The only site I'll ever need...

[Brownie]

We had a discussion on red-light cameras before, but do any legal types think I have a chance in Hell in fighting a right-turn-on-red ticket?

[J. Walter Weatherman]

We had a discussion on red-light cameras before, but do any legal types think I have a chance in Hell in fighting a right-turn-on-red ticket?

What's this? Another dickweed who thinks that the laws don't apply to him? I bet Gil can help you out.

[Slaky]

Another legal question: let's say there's a large news aggregator that I might frequent. And let's say I wanted to set up a novelty account that only a few people would even get. Let's say the name of that novelty account is the real life name of a person I once worked for that I despise. Let's say I'm not saying things like "I murdered people" or "I have dead children in my basement" but instead saying idiotic things, things that don't make sense at all and generally playing the fool. While there is nothing to gain from this venture other than a smirk of satisfaction after each post and the small chance that this person happens upon her or his name making these less than intelligent comments, what trouble could I get in by doing this, if any?


TL;DR - I want to make a novelty account making fun of my old boss but I'm wondering if I could get in some kind of trouble by using the real name of the person.

[ChuckD]

We had a discussion on red-light cameras before, but do any legal types think I have a chance in Hell in fighting a right-turn-on-red ticket?

What's a right-turn-on-red ticket?

[J. Walter Weatherman]

We had a discussion on red-light cameras before, but do any legal types think I have a chance in Hell in fighting a right-turn-on-red ticket?

What's a right-turn-on-red ticket?

A ticket for turning right on red where prohibited?

[CT III]

We had a discussion on red-light cameras before, but do any legal types think I have a chance in Hell in fighting a right-turn-on-red ticket?

What's a right-turn-on-red ticket?

A ticket for turning right on red where prohibited?

Or not coming to a full stop before making said turn.  Not sure the camera can accurately catch that one though.

[Brownie]

We had a discussion on red-light cameras before, but do any legal types think I have a chance in Hell in fighting a right-turn-on-red ticket?

What's a right-turn-on-red ticket?

A ticket for turning right on red where prohibited?

It's the former. Apparently, "due process" is an administrative hearing.

Or not coming to a full stop before making said turn.  Not sure the camera can accurately catch that one though.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

We had a discussion on red-light cameras before, but do any legal types think I have a chance in Hell in fighting a right-turn-on-red ticket?

What's a right-turn-on-red ticket?

A ticket for turning right on red where prohibited?

Or not coming to a full stop before making said turn.  Not sure the camera can accurately catch that one though.

It's the former. Apparently, "due process" is an administrative hearing.

Where you're considered guilty until proven innocent beyond a shadow of a doubt.

[CBStew]

Another legal question: let's say there's a large news aggregator that I might frequent. And let's say I wanted to set up a novelty account that only a few people would even get. Let's say the name of that novelty account is the real life name of a person I once worked for that I despise. Let's say I'm not saying things like "I murdered people" or "I have dead children in my basement" but instead saying idiotic things, things that don't make sense at all and generally playing the fool. While there is nothing to gain from this venture other than a smirk of satisfaction after each post and the small chance that this person happens upon her or his name making these less than intelligent comments, what trouble could I get in by doing this, if any?


TL;DR - I want to make a novelty account making fun of my old boss but I'm wondering if I could get in some kind of trouble by using the real name of the person.

Do not take this as authoritative, since I have never gotten into any changes in the law that have come about as a result of the internet.  However, under plain old "by the book" defamation law, you  can defame a person by saying things about that person which are not true and which attack that person's reputation.  You can do this by saying "Sarah Jablonski murdered her grandmother" or by saying "I, Sarah Jablonski, murdered my grandmother."  I don't have the time or the inclination to go into a treatise on the law of Libel, which would pertain to a written publication such as this,  but the simple answer is, yes, conceivably you could get into trouble.  (Disclaimer.  This statement was for purposes of explanation only .  It is not intended to be a reflection upon Ms. Jablonski's character.  She is a perfectly wonderful, caring, and delightful person who loves her grandmother.  Who by the way, is alive and well and living in West Palm Beach.)

[Brownie]

Another legal question: let's say there's a large news aggregator that I might frequent. And let's say I wanted to set up a novelty account that only a few people would even get. Let's say the name of that novelty account is the real life name of a person I once worked for that I despise. Let's say I'm not saying things like "I murdered people" or "I have dead children in my basement" but instead saying idiotic things, things that don't make sense at all and generally playing the fool. While there is nothing to gain from this venture other than a smirk of satisfaction after each post and the small chance that this person happens upon her or his name making these less than intelligent comments, what trouble could I get in by doing this, if any?


TL;DR - I want to make a novelty account making fun of my old boss but I'm wondering if I could get in some kind of trouble by using the real name of the person.

Do not take this as authoritative, since I have never gotten into any changes in the law that have come about as a result of the internet.  However, under plain old "by the book" defamation law, you  can defame a person by saying things about that person which are not true and which attack that person's reputation.  You can do this by saying "Sarah Jablonski murdered her grandmother" or by saying "I, Sarah Jablonski, murdered my grandmother."  I don't have the time or the inclination to go into a treatise on the law of Libel, which would pertain to a written publication such as this,  but the simple answer is, yes, conceivably you could get into trouble.  (Disclaimer.  This statement was for purposes of explanation only .  It is not intended to be a reflection upon Ms. Jablonski's character.  She is a perfectly wonderful, caring, and delightful person who loves her grandmother.  Who by the way, is alive and well and living in West Palm Beach.)

However, if Slak was apparent in that he really wasn't that person and that he was only lampooning him, isn't that conceivably protected (Falwell v. Hustler?

This case, incidentally, protects many of us from Kurtevans-style lawsuits. At least in the U.S. of A.

[CBStew]

Another legal question: let's say there's a large news aggregator that I might frequent. And let's say I wanted to set up a novelty account that only a few people would even get. Let's say the name of that novelty account is the real life name of a person I once worked for that I despise. Let's say I'm not saying things like "I murdered people" or "I have dead children in my basement" but instead saying idiotic things, things that don't make sense at all and generally playing the fool. While there is nothing to gain from this venture other than a smirk of satisfaction after each post and the small chance that this person happens upon her or his name making these less than intelligent comments, what trouble could I get in by doing this, if any?


TL;DR - I want to make a novelty account making fun of my old boss but I'm wondering if I could get in some kind of trouble by using the real name of the person.

Do not take this as authoritative, since I have never gotten into any changes in the law that have come about as a result of the internet.  However, under plain old "by the book" defamation law, you  can defame a person by saying things about that person which are not true and which attack that person's reputation.  You can do this by saying "Sarah Jablonski murdered her grandmother" or by saying "I, Sarah Jablonski, murdered my grandmother."  I don't have the time or the inclination to go into a treatise on the law of Libel, which would pertain to a written publication such as this,  but the simple answer is, yes, conceivably you could get into trouble.  (Disclaimer.  This statement was for purposes of explanation only .  It is not intended to be a reflection upon Ms. Jablonski's character.  She is a perfectly wonderful, caring, and delightful person who loves her grandmother.  Who by the way, is alive and well and living in West Palm Beach.)

However, if Slak was apparent in that he really wasn't that person and that he was only lampooning him, isn't that conceivably protected (Falwell v. Hustler?

This case, incidentally, protects many of us from Kurtevans-style lawsuits. At least in the U.S. of A.

You are going to lure me into a full blown diatribe.   To start with, there may be a difference between Jerry Falwell and Sarah Jablonski with regard to being in the "public eye" and therefore more susceptible to comment.  A different standard applies.  Although I said "to start with", I think I will end with that as well. 

[Slaky]

Another legal question: let's say there's a large news aggregator that I might frequent. And let's say I wanted to set up a novelty account that only a few people would even get. Let's say the name of that novelty account is the real life name of a person I once worked for that I despise. Let's say I'm not saying things like "I murdered people" or "I have dead children in my basement" but instead saying idiotic things, things that don't make sense at all and generally playing the fool. While there is nothing to gain from this venture other than a smirk of satisfaction after each post and the small chance that this person happens upon her or his name making these less than intelligent comments, what trouble could I get in by doing this, if any?


TL;DR - I want to make a novelty account making fun of my old boss but I'm wondering if I could get in some kind of trouble by using the real name of the person.

Do not take this as authoritative, since I have never gotten into any changes in the law that have come about as a result of the internet.  However, under plain old "by the book" defamation law, you  can defame a person by saying things about that person which are not true and which attack that person's reputation.  You can do this by saying "Sarah Jablonski murdered her grandmother" or by saying "I, Sarah Jablonski, murdered my grandmother."  I don't have the time or the inclination to go into a treatise on the law of Libel, which would pertain to a written publication such as this,  but the simple answer is, yes, conceivably you could get into trouble.  (Disclaimer.  This statement was for purposes of explanation only .  It is not intended to be a reflection upon Ms. Jablonski's character.  She is a perfectly wonderful, caring, and delightful person who loves her grandmother.  Who by the way, is alive and well and living in West Palm Beach.)

However, if Slak was apparent in that he really wasn't that person and that he was only lampooning him, isn't that conceivably protected (Falwell v. Hustler?

This case, incidentally, protects many of us from Kurtevans-style lawsuits. At least in the U.S. of A.

You are going to lure me into a full blown diatribe.   To start with, there may be a difference between Jerry Falwell and Sarah Jablonski with regard to being in the "public eye" and therefore more susceptible to comment.  A different standard applies.  Although I said "to start with", I think I will end with that as well. 

All right, you've talked me out of it.

[Oleg]

Another legal question: let's say there's a large news aggregator that I might frequent. And let's say I wanted to set up a novelty account that only a few people would even get. Let's say the name of that novelty account is the real life name of a person I once worked for that I despise. Let's say I'm not saying things like "I murdered people" or "I have dead children in my basement" but instead saying idiotic things, things that don't make sense at all and generally playing the fool. While there is nothing to gain from this venture other than a smirk of satisfaction after each post and the small chance that this person happens upon her or his name making these less than intelligent comments, what trouble could I get in by doing this, if any?


TL;DR - I want to make a novelty account making fun of my old boss but I'm wondering if I could get in some kind of trouble by using the real name of the person.

Do not take this as authoritative, since I have never gotten into any changes in the law that have come about as a result of the internet.  However, under plain old "by the book" defamation law, you  can defame a person by saying things about that person which are not true and which attack that person's reputation.  You can do this by saying "Sarah Jablonski murdered her grandmother" or by saying "I, Sarah Jablonski, murdered my grandmother."  I don't have the time or the inclination to go into a treatise on the law of Libel, which would pertain to a written publication such as this,  but the simple answer is, yes, conceivably you could get into trouble.  (Disclaimer.  This statement was for purposes of explanation only .  It is not intended to be a reflection upon Ms. Jablonski's character.  She is a perfectly wonderful, caring, and delightful person who loves her grandmother.  Who by the way, is alive and well and living in West Palm Beach.)

However, if Slak was apparent in that he really wasn't that person and that he was only lampooning him, isn't that conceivably protected (Falwell v. Hustler?

This case, incidentally, protects many of us from Kurtevans-style lawsuits. At least in the U.S. of A.

How does this solve Stew's racoon problem?

[Bort]

Another legal question: let's say there's a large news aggregator that I might frequent. And let's say I wanted to set up a novelty account that only a few people would even get. Let's say the name of that novelty account is the real life name of a person I once worked for that I despise. Let's say I'm not saying things like "I murdered people" or "I have dead children in my basement" but instead saying idiotic things, things that don't make sense at all and generally playing the fool. While there is nothing to gain from this venture other than a smirk of satisfaction after each post and the small chance that this person happens upon her or his name making these less than intelligent comments, what trouble could I get in by doing this, if any?


TL;DR - I want to make a novelty account making fun of my old boss but I'm wondering if I could get in some kind of trouble by using the real name of the person.

Do not take this as authoritative, since I have never gotten into any changes in the law that have come about as a result of the internet.  However, under plain old "by the book" defamation law, you  can defame a person by saying things about that person which are not true and which attack that person's reputation.  You can do this by saying "Sarah Jablonski murdered her grandmother" or by saying "I, Sarah Jablonski, murdered my grandmother."  I don't have the time or the inclination to go into a treatise on the law of Libel, which would pertain to a written publication such as this,  but the simple answer is, yes, conceivably you could get into trouble.  (Disclaimer.  This statement was for purposes of explanation only .  It is not intended to be a reflection upon Ms. Jablonski's character.  She is a perfectly wonderful, caring, and delightful person who loves her grandmother.  Who by the way, is alive and well and living in West Palm Beach.)

However, if Slak was apparent in that he really wasn't that person and that he was only lampooning him, isn't that conceivably protected (Falwell v. Hustler?

This case, incidentally, protects many of us from Kurtevans-style lawsuits. At least in the U.S. of A.

How does this solve Stew's racoon problem?

Because Carlos Zambrano is awesome?

[BH]

Another legal question: let's say there's a large news aggregator that I might frequent. And let's say I wanted to set up a novelty account that only a few people would even get. Let's say the name of that novelty account is the real life name of a person I once worked for that I despise. Let's say I'm not saying things like "I murdered people" or "I have dead children in my basement" but instead saying idiotic things, things that don't make sense at all and generally playing the fool. While there is nothing to gain from this venture other than a smirk of satisfaction after each post and the small chance that this person happens upon her or his name making these less than intelligent comments, what trouble could I get in by doing this, if any?


TL;DR - I want to make a novelty account making fun of my old boss but I'm wondering if I could get in some kind of trouble by using the real name of the person.

I bet if you just asked Oleg, he'd be ok with this.