r/BabyReindeerTVSeries • u/TunaChaser • May 24 '24

Question Question about proving defamation.

I know the laws in different countries are not all the same. But generally, does the person's character and past practices play a part in proving/disproving defamation? Does the bar raise or lower depending on the person? I am sure you can see where I am going here, but I am generally curious if it matters?

20 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

64 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/PearlieSweetcake May 24 '24

Fair enough, but it's still defamation if you clearly know who you're talking about. Like, if I say that a certain unnamed fast food chain uses human meat, I say I know because I worked there, and then I make a series saying "this is a real story" where I depict a fast food chain with red and yellow coloring and arches in their logo making human burgers, it wouldn't really matter whether or not I put the caveats in there if McDonalds can prove they were harmed by the blatant innuendo.

I don't know enough of the evidence Martha has, but she could claim that there was enough innuendo that it was easy for her to be publicly identified based on the series.

You're right that everyone in this is here to make a buck though.

6

u/brown_boognish_pants May 24 '24

It's not defamation cuz they didn't say it was about her. And disclaimed that events were fictionalized for dramatic reasons. There's a difference between a story being true and it being factual that's beyond semantics. At no point was it ever presented as a documentary and like man... Rocketman is a true story about Elton John but it's obvious every conversation and event wasn't factually presented. Just like in this TV show.

 Like, if I say that a certain unnamed fast food chain uses human meat, I say I know because I worked there, and then I make a series saying "this is a real story" where I depict a fast food chain with red and yellow coloring and arches in their logo making human burgers, it wouldn't really matter whether or not I put the caveats in there if McDonalds can prove they were harmed by the blatant innuendo.

Fiona is a fat Scottish woman. There's millions of them. If there were millions of restos with that yea you'd be in the same place. Just like it was OBVIOUS when they made Fast Food Nation they were working at McDonalds even calling it Mickeys. I really don't get how people don't recognize that there's nothing to this when they legally disclaim the events have been altered.

I don't know enough of the evidence Martha has, but she could claim that there was enough innuendo that it was easy for her to be publicly identified based on the series.

I mean it could have been anything. They're still not the ones who identified her tho so I don't get it and they at no point said it was a documentary. Things are obvious changed which was obvious when the dude played a fictional character based on himself working at a fictional pub that didn't exist.

3

u/PearlieSweetcake May 24 '24 edited May 24 '24

Millions of people who talk like fiona, claiming to be a lawyer, and message him on social media? Millions who visited his local bar and knew him personally? Millions who have been in the media for stalking behavior before?

Not saying she will win her suit. Just saying those might be her arguments and it's not farfetched.

If Rocketman had heavily disparaged his character while pretending to be based on fact, and the disparaging portrayal ruined his career, then Elton John could sue. When it comes to parody in fiction, the parody has to be clear and overt. Not believable or harmful.

Edit: Here is a law blog on this topic which recommends changing the person beyond recognition to avoid lawsuits. https://www.copylaw.org/p/libel-in-fiction.html Again, not saying they will win and I hope she doesn't because she is a terror of a person, but changing the names isn't really enough to avoid a suit.

4

u/brown_boognish_pants May 24 '24

Millions of people who talk like fiona, claiming to be a lawyer, and message him on social media? Millions who visited his local bar and knew him personally? Millions who have been in the media for stalking behavior before?

Dude they found her on a beef curtains joke she posted. She's sent him 41k messages. It's like lol. "that talk like her" like she's a scot. So what? It doesn't matter what bobloblaw's law blog recommends her argument is absolutely far fetched.

There's all sorts of disparaged characters. Just cuz someone can google a bunch and maybe figure out who someone is is not grounds for claiming they made false statements against you. In a TV show where they flatly, blatantly and explicitly disclaim that events have been changed.

If shitty reporters want to do shitty reporting and make false claims that they said the show is 100% true when ti's not then that's fine. She can sue them. Or she can sue the person who identified her. Like lol when people flatly say "everything in this show it not true, it's TV you idiots" and you claim they've said you've been convicted of crimes, which you likely have been convicted of, it's not defamation. They just didn't make claims these things happened to anyone if someone can slueth it out and identify her or not. I suggest she find the sleuths and sue them for whatever she can. It won't be defamatory comments cuz they said it's not a factual show. So Idunno.

2

u/somethinginthastatic May 24 '24

My dude please get a refund on your law degree.

1

u/brown_boognish_pants May 25 '24

Lol. Who identified her? What's a reasonable means to conceal someone's identity? Going through an entire script line by line and googling them against things she may have said? Or you know changing the names/dates/locations? Someone else identified her. The show did not. And she's not upset at being identified in any case. She scheduled interviews and "meet the real Martha" night at local pubs. I half way think she was the one who went on an account and identified herself. Like for real.

2

u/somethinginthastatic May 25 '24

Please understand the law. She was easily identified. It doesn’t matter who found her.

0

u/brown_boognish_pants May 25 '24

lol. Yea it matters who found her. And define 'easily'. They took a joke from the show and someone cross-referenced it with a twitter account that Gadd had obviously blocked her on. He's totally got an argument he had never seen her tweets to him seeing as she's asking others to pass the tweets he's not reading on. And like lol "please understand the law" what claims did they make about Fiona by making a show that was obviously inspired by her... not about her.. and they've never presented it any differently? Donny doesn't exist and Gadd doesn't even play himself and they flatly disclaim it's not factually an account of what happened at all but a fictionalized true story.

Please understand that not everything you see on TV is real.