Phaneuf, Cuthbert, and Lupul seeking damages from TSN & Tweeter

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by BigTuna

Yup. They already lost most NHL hockey, now this happens. It's a disaster.

Apparently Sportsnet was also just awarded the English language rights to the 2016 World Cup too:

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=7...d=nhl:topheads

(ESPN won the US rights, which is great for the NHL as well)

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

The thing is it doesn't matter how you feel. It matters how Phaneuf, Cuthbert and Lupul feel.
They are within their rights to launch legal action against all those involved. And I'm happy they are doing it.

Maybe so but this is a message board where I like everyone posts their personal opinion.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Apparently Sportsnet was also just awarded the English language rights to the 2016 World Cup too:

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=7...d=nhl:topheads

(ESPN won the US rights, which is great for the NHL as well)

I prefer NBC broadcasts for hockey in the US actually. I think they've done a wonderful job of trying to distinguish themselves in broadcasting hockey.

I can safely say NBC is my favorite broadcast, period. Sportsnet is amateur hour game after game, HNIC & Hometown hockey are just horrendous, and TSN just ain't what it used to be. Although TSN still does have the best panels, hands down.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by memphusk

Life in the spotlight. I'm sure its not the first or the last time she will run into these types of things. I guess my take on it is that everything gets so far blown out of proportion anymore that it's frustrating.

Right so because you are famous people can publish lies about you? That about sum it up.
Terrible take.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

What's the difference between the garbage tabloids write about celebrities and this? Honestly curious. There's no way half the stuff they write is true.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

What's the difference between the garbage tabloids write about celebrities and this? Honestly curious. There's no way half the stuff they write is true.

Which is why they get sued a lot.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

It's funny if you're talking about it with buddies or behind closed doors. It's not funny when some idiot posts it to twitter and another idiot allows it to pass through moderation. TSN should be embarrassed that they either missed this or don't have a system in place to ensure it doesn't get missed.

The fact that it made it to air was why it was funny to me. If a friend said it to me it would be kind of stupid and random. I completely agree though that TSN should be embarrassed and it should have never happened though. At the end of the day though I don't feel that bad for them. Either it's true and you reap what you sew or its not and life goes on. Your three people in the public spotlight this comes with the territory unfortunately. With twitter people have a voice and their going to speak it right or wrong. TSN was just really unprofessional in allowing it on their platform. I can understand it being embarassing for them so if they take legal action good for them that's their right and choice. I'd rather see actual harassment cases like the guys and Schillings daughter in court though.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Which is why they get sued a lot.

Wasn't aware they were sued a lot, thanks. Doesn't seem like a good business model. Yet they never go away, so spreading lies must be lucrative if you can get sued all the time and not go under. Maybe they can write off lawsuits as a business expense lol

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

What's the difference between the garbage tabloids write about celebrities and this? Honestly curious. There's no way half the stuff they write is true.

Expectation and integrity. No one expects anything true from a tabloid and they tend to get what they expect. TSN is a Sports NEWS outlet. What they report is expected to be true. So when you see that tweet broadcast on a news report what is the level of expectation there?

Also, tabloids get sued constantly.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

To successfully sue for libel, I was under the impression you had to prove that it caused you lost wages/opportunity. I'm not seeing how this is that, not that it excuses TSN at all mind you, they have major egg on their face here. Ironically, it will be their reputation that takes the biggest hit over this I'd imagine.

TSN will probably give them money to get them to drop the suit, but how is that really going to help them other than by making them 1% richer? Now the public is a lot more aware of the tweet than they otherwise would've been. Classic Streisand effect. I'm not sure making their grievances public so fast was all that smart if they were hoping to minimize damage to their reputation.

I wonder if they even approached TSN before they made that public statement. Perhaps TSN balked at the demands but something tells me that statement was the first they heard that the lawyers were indeed involved.

Anyone know how Burke's lawsuit is going? I had almost forgotten about that one until this made the news. That's another one I'm not sure how it's provable that lost wages/opportunity occurred.

You have to prove you suffered a harm to your reputation within the community. Often lost wages or opportunity because of the defamatory comments are the easiest way to quantify them, but not the only way.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Locke

Expectation and integrity. No one expects anything true from a tabloid and they tend to get what they expect. TSN is a Sports NEWS outlet. What they report is expected to be true. So when you see that tweet broadcast on a news report what is the level of expectation there?

Also, tabloids get sued constantly.

Do they use that as a defense in court? "Sorry you can't sue us because what we print are obviously lies because we are lying liars that lie."

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

You have to prove you suffered a harm to your reputation within the community. Often lost wages or opportunity because of the defamatory comments are the easiest way to quantify them, but not the only way.

Thanks for the clarification. That's still sounds like something that will be awfully difficult to prove and assign a dollar figure to.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Do they use that as a defense in court? "Sorry you can't sue us because what we print are obviously lies because we are lying liars that lie."

I dont think they defend themselves at all actually. I'm pretty sure their #1 expense is paying out damages.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Locke

I dont think they defend themselves at all actually. I'm pretty sure their #1 expense is paying out damages.

Fair enough, I'm sure it's true. It just sounds completely and utterly insane. Must be a decent profit margin in there somewhere I guess, otherwise why would they do it? Crazy that selling lies is THAT lucrative.

[memphusk]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Right so because you are famous people can publish lies about you? That about sum it up.
Terrible take.

No, that's just how it is. If your famous, people talk. And they lie. And they make up stories. And they sniff around your.personal life for dirt. Then they throw it out there for the world to see. I'm not saying its ok, I'm just saying that's how it is.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Hackey

The fact that it made it to air was why it was funny to me. If a friend said it to me it would be kind of stupid and random. I completely agree though that TSN should be embarrassed and it should have never happened though. At the end of the day though I don't feel that bad for them. Either it's true and you reap what you *sow or *it's not and life goes on. *You're three people in the public spotlight*, and this comes with the territory unfortunately. With twitter people have a voice and *they're going to speak it right or wrong. TSN was just really unprofessional in allowing it on their platform. I can understand it being embarassing for them so if they take legal action good for them that's their right and choice. I'd rather see actual harassment cases like the guys and *Schilling's daughter in court though.

You are very wrong. Just because you are famous does not give others carte blanche to make up lies about you. As someone said earlier, is it OK for me to tell your boss you are a paedophile, and you get fired? Or is that not OK, because you are not famous?

And I fixed your post for you...

[photon]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

What's the difference between the garbage tabloids write about celebrities and this? Honestly curious. There's no way half the stuff they write is true.

Depending on what's written, sometimes no difference. Tabloids have been sued successfully for what they've written.

But tabloids probably have a lot of experience on how to word things and just how far to go. And some people probably avoid suing them because they feel the damage of that publicity probably outweighs the damage of the tabloid. Or that tabloids don't have lots of money like they used to.

There are defences for defamation, truth being one, but there are a few others, including opinions, and comments that may be defamatory but are done in good faith and without malice to as few people as possible (like saying someone caused a morale problem in a job reference). Reporting or discussing matters of public interest is a defence as well, which is why we don't want people spreading rumours here, but if something is published elsewhere or we are talking about the rumour not spreading the rumour it's ok.

Pretty much all the examples Buster and similar have used to try and draw parallels to the tweet are false equivalences, being opinions or discussion of reports of public interest, etc. That's why it's fine to say player x is a bad influence (opinion) and not player y slept with z (defamatory if untrue).

[Righteous1]

So if it were true, they wouldn't be able to sue tsn?

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Thanks for the clarification. That's still sounds like something that will be awfully difficult to prove and assign a dollar figure to.

You're welcome.

It is, but the winner will get solicitor and his own client costs, on a full indemnity basis, meaning the actual legal fees paid.
This will be quite substantial in such a case, and are extremely difficult to get in most circumstances.

[Hugh Jahrmes]

This right here is the reason anytime I talk about who's sleeping with Elisha Cuthbert, it's me.