US vs UK Libel Laws
The cluster focuses on comparisons between US and UK libel/defamation laws, highlighting how US laws place a higher burden of proof on plaintiffs while UK laws are more plaintiff-friendly and easier to use for silencing critics.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
Libel laws in the US are extremely different than those described. I believe UK ones are far more similar to it than the US ones.
Worth pointing out that you're talking purely from a US point of view, and different countries treat slander and libel differently.For example in the US, to sue for defamation you need to prove something is false, whereas in the UK the defendant has to prove that what they said or wrote (and are being sued for) is true.(I've no idea whether this app had any non-US use, but thought worth adding this comment regardless since it's a general point about defamation law and being
You might want to look into libel and defamation laws in the US too lolhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law
Find a reason to sue them in the US. That's how people use the UK's horrible libel laws.
Legal might be part of it. UK/EU libel laws, etc.
Not even if they are causing you real harm by lying?Other countries don't allow as much of that as the U.S. does, like the U.K. for example [0]:> "English laws are much more favorable for someone looking to protect their reputation," says Jenny Afia, a lawyer in London who often represents people making libel and privacy claims.> In American courts, the burden of proof rests with the person who brings a claim of libel. In British courts, the author or journalist has
What country does? Even the US has laws against libel, hate speech, etc.
The UK is far worse than the US when it comes to libel law: if a big company sues, the burden of proof is on the individual sued to document every statement. In the US, the plaintiff has the burden of proving that the statements were false and damaging.
Libel laws in the UK are way more problematic / idiosyncratic than law about "incitement to hatred", which are common (at least in Europe) and made to repress dog whistles.edit: SLAPP suits are basically legal there, and often used to suppress speech or journalism which would be legitimate and even encouraged elsewhere.see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E
In some countries that would be Libel.