> @LokiV a joke is not defamation. You could afford to be more pragmatic in the delivery of your thoughts. Sometimes our phones auto correct incorrectly. This is just the reality of technology.
@ThePangburn
So Travis, you'd be willing to pay the legal retainers for Colbert and Kimmel shows, since jokes cannot draw legal action as they're incapable of being actionable as slander or libel?
Your claim is simply not true, while it's an issue of distinguishing relevant details that determines the difference. Give or take 5-10 years of one's life plus millions for legal fees, that the "joke" of a "justice" system imposed under threat of kidnapping or execution, pretends every target of its process must have available for potential litigation, even if patently absurd or malicious. Falwell even won a $400k judgment that could have stood, had Flynt not kicked in over $2 million in legal fees alone to get that fraud based judgment (Falwell's allegedly harmed mother was effectively a fiction character, not any actual person in context) reversed.
Do you remember when MasterCard had NYC law firm Baker-Botts sending often specious legal threat letters to satire and parody video and graphic ad publishers, whether for the "Priceless" theme, or "MasterRace"? They intimidated lots of targets to cave, until a couple got help from PILG projects at Harvard law and Public Citizen in DC, and shut down that abuse of legal process. In the process, US protections for such speech was expanded as clearly protecting commercial satire and parody, versus previously only noncommercial forms.
Too bad the best of those used older video tech, as the one that concludes with a girl's father telling her to give the guy a blow job already, was "Priceless".
