Attn: Teachers

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by photon

Um no, it's only defamatory if it's untrue. Truth is the ultimate defence for defamation cases.

And expressing a negative opinion isn't defamation.

Not true, if someone is spreading negative remarks to destroy someones reputation it can definatly be considered slander.

Also personal opinions are wide open for interpritation.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Libel

The classic definition is:

"a publication without justification or lawful excuse which is calculated to injure the reputation of another by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule."
(Parke, B. in Parmiter v. Coupland (1840) GM&W 105 at 108)

[ken0042]

Sorry Jolinar, I'm going to trust the lawyer's word on this over yours.

[habernac]

two words : without justification

[@theCBE]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Libel

The classic definition is:

"...without justification...
(Parke, B. in Parmiter v. Coupland (1840) GM&W 105 at 108)

Thats the part you are not getting.. if its TRUE then its justified.

Edit.. habernac beat me to it

[troutman]

Opinion is a defense recognized in nearly every jurisdiction. If the person makes a statement of opinion rather than a statement of fact, defamation claims usually cannot be brought because opinions are inherently not falsifiable. Some jurisdictions have eliminated the distinction between fact and opinion, and allow any statements suggesting a factual basis to support a defamation claim.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel

[StoneCole]

Joe's school not on there (that's my old man). Neither is Louise' (my mom). I really wanted some comfirmation that Joe is in fact a hard-ass. (He's not really).

Both elementary schools, so not surprising.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by habernac

two words : without justification

Yes, one has to be justified, you can't just go printing and saying things to try and discredit them.

I guess what I am trying to say is that personal opinions are not fact and are open for interpretation and law suits.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Yes, one has to be justified, you can't just go printing and saying things to try and discredit them.

Assuming your interpritation is correct, the person didn't just go printing something. He was asked for his opinion; the site is called Rate My Teachers- and that would be what the person is doing.

[KevanGuy]

Isnt this kinda like that 'Dont date him girl" website? I cant remember exactly what it is called. THe one where women would go on an slam ex-boyfriends? Didnt some dude sue the webmaster?

[jolinar of malkshor]

Can statements be protected by the use of the words "alleged", "it is rumoured" or by use of quotation marks?

This answer is no. One cannot escape liability for defamation by putting the libel behind a prefix such as "I have been told that ..." or "It is rumoured that ...", and then asserting that it was true that one had been told or that it was in fact being rumoured.... For the purpose of the law of libel, the hearsay statement is the same as a direct statement.
(Lord Devlin in Lewis v. Daily Telegraph Ltd., [1963] 2 All E.R. 151 at 173)

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Under the current legal regime, you can be sued for anything you say about another person that damages their reputation. If sued, the onus is on you to prove the truth of your statements; the fact that you genuinely believed them to be true is not good enough. Even truth is not an absolute defence --- if the court finds you told the truth but your intent was malicious, you might lose anyway. Canadian libel law is so draconian that people come from all over the world to file libel suits in Ontario.

http://www.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~shallit/libel3.html

Damages awarded for on-line defamatory statements by a parent

http://www.mross.com/law/Publication...?contentId=594

All I am saying is that if people put little comments about how they hate their teacher and that they are terrible and nasty, they open themselves up to litigation.

[NSFL]

I really don't see the point in rating teachers for K-12. First of all, they're rated by kids, and kids are just way to immature to really have a good opinion on anything like this sometimes. And second, you can't pick your teachers, so there's no need to rate a teacher. But for post secondary, I use http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ and I think it's great because you can choose your profs and this way you get a general idea of what you're getting.

[STeeLy]

This site has been known for a while and I've seen people go on it in Class (I'm a studen BTW) they also do it at home... However, opinion on teachers differentiates...

Though I really think that exposing addresses shouldn't be allowed... private information should be kept PRIVATE... and I think teachers are actually added by the students if I'm not mistaken.

[photon]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Damages awarded for on-line defamatory statements by a parent

http://www.mross.com/law/Publication...?contentId=594

All I am saying is that if people put little comments about how they hate their teacher and that they are terrible and nasty, they open themselves up to litigation.

That link you provided says "The Court held that the serious, sweeping and false defamatory statements were part of a prolonged character assassination campaign motivated by malice on the part of Halstead."

Emphasis mine...

And in the other case mentioned in yoru first link, it seems the sticky point was the term "Nazi", but calling the person a racist and an anti-semite were fine because they were both true. That the guy was a Nazi in the judge's view wasn't an opinion, that was a false statement.

As for your quote, it's not relevant to defence of defamation that we're talking about. It says: "For the purpose of the law of libel, the hearsay statement is the same as a direct statement." That's only saying that putting an "I was told.." is not a defence. That's got nothing to do with personal opinions.

Yes, personal opinion gets to be fuzzy and where the line between expressing an opinion and character assasination is the whole reason these things go to trial. But I'll side with the lawyer in this discussion; truth is an absolute defence.

" I guess what I am trying to say is that personal opinions are not fact and are open for interpretation and law suits."

Right in that opinions are not fact.. and opinions aren't defamation. In extreme cases where someone is abusing someone else's freedoms then there'd be other factors at play.

EDITED: Fixed a missatement.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by photon

That link you provided says "The Court held that the serious, sweeping and false defamatory statements were part of a prolonged character assassination campaign motivated by malice on the part of Halstead."

Emphasis mine...

And in the other case mentioned in yoru first link, it seems the sticky point was the term "Nazi", but calling the person a racist and an anti-semite were fine because they were both true. That the guy was a Nazi in the judge's view wasn't an opinion, that was a false statement.

As for your quote, it's not relevant to defence of defamation that we're talking about. It says: "For the purpose of the law of libel, the hearsay statement is the same as a direct statement." That's only saying that putting an "I was told.." is not a defence. That's got nothing to do with personal opinions.

Yes, personal opinion gets to be fuzzy and where the line between expressing an opinion and character assasination is the whole reason these things go to trial. But I'll side with the lawyer in this discussion; truth is an absolute defence.

" I guess what I am trying to say is that personal opinions are not fact and are open for interpretation and law suits."

Right in that opinions are not fact.. and opinions aren't defamation. In extreme cases where someone is abusing someone else's freedoms then there'd be other factors at play.

EDITED: Fixed a missatement.

It does not have to be fact, it can be someones personal opinion.

2. Libel is the false broadcast or publication communicated through words, pictures, sounds or gestures that harms a person's reputation by exposure to hate, ridicule or contempt in the minds of the average member of the community. Forms of harm include: damage to personal reputation, social contacts, and occupation. Ridicule and contempt are forms of damage. Some words used in a description can be libelous such as crook, slut, murderer etc

http://www.ncra.ca/resources/mediaLaw/definitions.cfm

FALSE doesnt have to be fact. Simply publically stating that your a cheat, lieing fag. Is good enough. That can be someones opinion.

[photon]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

FALSE doesnt have to be fact. Simply publically stating that your a cheat, lieing fag. Is good enough. That can be someones opinion.

In the context of defamation though those aren't opinions. If you call someone a cheat and you have proof they cheated, it isn't defamation (the cheating is true, so it's a defence against defamation). If you call someone a liar and have proof they lied, it isn't defamation. If you call someone a fag and have proof, then it isn't defamation (though it might be a hate crime or something). If you don't have proof, it's defamation because the statements could be (and I think are assumed to be) false.

An opinion is a statement that applies to the person making it only, can't be proven one way or another. Not sure what a good definition of opinion would be in the context of the laws.

[Dogbert]

I checked out the ratings for my junior-high and high schools. The ratings on there are surprisingly similar to what I thought of the teachers I had.

[Clarkey]

I think this site is great. It provides some accountability to a profession that doesn't seem to have much. Bad teachers get paid the same as good teachers and it's almost impossible to get fired. There aren't very many incentives for teachers to do a good job or improve, and 'self satisfaction' doesn't seem to be enough for many. Maybe the public scrutiny this site provides will finally force some teachers to improve. I checked out some of my highschool teachers and the negative reviews were actually somewhat well put for the most part. I think the site reviews all comments before they are posted. Almost every instructor on ratemyprofessor.com has a few bad reviews, the difference is that the good ones have a whole bunch of positive reviews that overshadow the bad ones.

[kootenayguy9]

As a teacher I think the site is BS. All you have to do is go on the site and post information. There is no Accountability. What's stopping me from going on there and posting information about myself and telling the world I am the best teacher ever! You don't even have to put your name down or an email address..........Maybe I should just do that (laughs)

[Antithesis]

Originally Posted by Clarkey

I think this site is great. It provides some accountability to a profession that doesn't seem to have much. Bad teachers get paid the same as good teachers and it's almost impossible to get fired. There aren't very many incentives for teachers to do a good job or improve, and 'self satisfaction' doesn't seem to be enough for many. Maybe the public scrutiny this site provides will finally force some teachers to improve. I checked out some of my highschool teachers and the negative reviews were actually somewhat well put for the most part. I think the site reviews all comments before they are posted. Almost every instructor on ratemyprofessor.com has a few bad reviews, the difference is that the good ones have a whole bunch of positive reviews that overshadow the bad ones.

The site is great if you're a 14 year old.

As a teacher, I'm afraid I have to discredit nearly everything you've said in your post.

#1 - Teachers have no incentive to improve

The vast majority of teachers, by their nature, seek out learning and development opportunities. The incentive to improve ourselves is sitting in front of us each and every day in the students we teach. Not all of us are communist unionists who do the minimum amount of work possible. We all have a genuine desire to see our students improve and better themselves. I've seen teachers who are so far into the macho tough-guy stereotype be brought to tears by letters from students talking about the impact they have had on their lives.

#2 - Teachers have no incentive to do a good job

Come on. Not even worth a response.

#3 - Public scrutiny brought in by the site ...

Please, this site is a joke. If you, as a teacher, formulate your ideas and beliefs on how your class should run based on the so-called musings of your students (no matter their age) you need to be in a different position. More often than not the 'criticisms' posted on this site have more to do with personality issues rather than constructive complaints about the actual teaching process. There is nothing wrong with taking student advice and suggestions and considering them, but I know personally that the staff at my school consider this website more unintentional humour than anything.

I'm sorry if my posting seems harsh but I have to say the opinions of a public who assume they are experts on eduication because they spent 12 years in school previously get old. I'm not calling you one of these windbags, but there is an awful lot more to teaching (and teachers) than you are giving us credit for.