Re: Case Studies

> As I understand the law of defamation (libel) you would be liable
>for any republication of an unsubstantiated incident if the original
>publication was defamatory. No change or modification would be
>sufficient unless it (a) changed the meaning or (b) clearly protected
>the identity of the individual -- and if readers would be able to
>determine the identity by going back to the original source that would
>likely not be enough. This of course assumes the original publication
>is defamatory.

Fair enough, as far as it goes but liability for the republication would still require some degree of fault (from negligence up to knowledge of falsity/reckless disregard), depending upon the public/private status of the individual plaintiff. In short, while the great changes in American defamation law over the past thirty years have not altered the proposition that one who republishes a libel is treated the same as the original publisher, the fault standards have attenuated the risk of republication.

shalpern[_at_]magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Sheldon W. Halpern
Ohio State University College of Law
Phone (614) 291-7525 (voice); (614) 291-3554 (fax) Received on Thu Jan 27 1994 - 21:42:11 GMT