What is a Public Figure?

I KNEW IT!!!!

See this is where it falls apart for me. If you limit the scope of your "public" arbitrarily, then eventually you can make EVERYBODY a public figure. If you Google my REAL LIFE name, you will find my standings on my High School Track team (way back when) from my local newspaper. I have also been quoted on my opinions about environmental issues when I was 15 in one of those "ask the average kid" reports from my local paper.

Some of these definitions still seem to be in contradiction with the the Legal dictionary:


I am not getting the feeling that "great public interest" is a relative term (I am of "great public interest" if you consider the public to be my family. So is my dog.) When playwrights and television reporters aren't making the cut as public figures I am sensing the spirit of this definition had presidents, athletes, and big corporate CEOs in mind.

Well said.

Not to mention, not just anyone can surf the SL forums, they must be a paying customer, so, SL and it's forums are not "public", not in the RL sense.

Blogs, on the other hand, are a little bit more of a grey area, in my opinion.

Less than 10% of residents use the forums. Forum trolls are not public figures.

I guess that lets you out, then, Weedy!

coco

Nice redirect of a generic statement into a personal one.

Reported for personal attack

I did this for fun at this site
http://www.googlefight.com/ ....

Thank you for reporting that. Also, please don't respond to personal attacks. I really think this is an important discussion and I don't want the thread to get locked.

Oh man... Philip pwned me!

Like you all don't know she was responding to me.

coco

the answer is a resounding maybe, gabe. The determination of an individuals status would rest a lot on the interpretation of individual facts and circumstances surrounding the defamation. I think somone positng for information on a dell website, even once a day would not rise to the leve of public figure. But If I were on the dell website as Jake Reitveld, dell guru, i might be a limited public figure.

Remember the status of public figure is defined by the size of the pond. So even in a town of 12000 you canbe a public figure. So even though only 10% of SL community uses the forums, you can still be a public figure for purposes of the forums. And yes even though SL is a private organization, you can still defame someone, and arguable make the assertion that they are a public figure. It would not be that common of an occurance, but strictyl speaking, the mear fact that SL is a relatively small private service does not change the constitutional analysis. We are being more theoretical here than practical.

However, even if you do not have the sort of notoriety to be a passive public figure, you can still make yourself a public figure by participation. In that case it does not matter what part of the gerenal public particpates in the debate, you can still be a public figure.
Telehubs are an issue that is public to SL, so even if only 1%of SL participates in a debate about telehubs, somoen who thrusts themselves inot that debate can still be a public figure.
Remember that the untimater determination is on a case by case basis. Of course this is what legally makes you a public figure, which was they way i read Aimee's post. If we are looking for acommuity definition, we have more leeway.

I actually didn't think she was referring to JUST YOU. There are quite a few forum trolls and for you to think that you are the only one is just absurd

MJ

Oh, you liked that, did you Aimee? Why? You don't want to hear what I have to say? You don't want people to know what this whole thread is really about? Or you just like to see me AR'd? Or just why, exactly? Tell me, because I am all ears.

Now, regarding personal attacks, I believe the TOS says it is okay to call someone a troll.

Which is doubtless why Weedy strongly insinuated I was one here, and flat out has stated it elsewhere, if my memory doesn't fail me.

So . . . let me get this straight:

Weedy can call me a troll, as often as she likes, and that is acceptable under the TOS.

I, however can't call her a troll. (My first time at that.) That is worthy of an AR for a personal attack.

Do I have that straight now?

Is that under the same sort of rulebook where Aimee can say what she wants about another resident, but the other resident can't say what he wants about her, EVEN IF IT IS ON ANOTHER SITE? And just where might this rule book about who gets free speech and who doesn't be found?

Just clue me in folks, I'm all ears.

coco

If someone creates a thread asking for public commentary on the forums, has anyone responding to that question "thrust" themselves into the debate or are they just answering a question put to the whole community (and presumably wanting response by the whole community). If you attend a city council meeting to give your two cents about whether your town needs a Wal*Mart, are you making yourself into a public figure or being a concerned citizen?

What about the idea that General and Off-Topic is just chit-chatting amongst acquaintainces?

And yes, I am only looking at this from a legal standpoint.

Folks, ignore her. Please.

Reported for slander.

Reported for excessive and malicious and unfounded reporting.

coco

Here's a clue... stop trying to derail an otherwise interesting thread.

To the real topic at hand...

Jake seems to be handling the legal terms pretty damn well, and that's not anywhere near my area of expertise anyway, so I'll just give my opinion, as it pertains to SL...

Many SL residents do very much thrust themselves into the spotlight. Because of this, they enjoy a certain level of SL 'fame', and due to that, it can very assuredly help any in-world businesses they may have. (Or harm them, if they're complete asshats.) This makes them a public figure, as far as SL is concerned.

I think it's pretty chicken-shit for someone to thrust themselves into the spotlight, but then expect no one to express negative opinions about them. The bad comes along with the good. If people don't want to be talked about, they shouldn't go out of their way to make themselves a topic. The motivation behind why they do it will always remain subjective and open to interpretation, since we can't really see inside their heads, but in some cases it's not exactly rocket surgery to figure out why people do things.

Folks, ignore him. Please. Even though he does have the most adorable icon on the forums.

coco

Here's a clue. Stop trying to tell me where I can post and can't.

coco

Aimee the answer is yes and no. Clearly the mayor of Rankin Texas is a public figure because he is a public official. But the towns most influential citizen could also be a public figure, even thoughn there are only 1100 people in the town.

Remember the purpose here the focus is not the public figure, the focus is on the speech of teh person that potentially defames the public figure. The entire point of the legal defintion of a public figure is to establish what speech about that person is constitutionally protected. Ifr making the determination of whether aimee weber is a public figure, we are not really focused on aimee, we are focused on the person who wrote the alleged defamation. This is a constitutional question because ostensibly the law cannot punish an individual for free speech, but it als protects a person from defamation. the quesstion is to what extent a person has relinquished that protection for personal gain, and to waht extent people have a right to comment on the opinions, actions, and abilites of others.

There are a number of complications present by the fact that what we do on the forums is volutary participation in a private setting. Certainly there is a lont of defamation going on in these forums. But there are more defenses to defamation than just public figure and truth. Actually most atheletes and big corporate CEO's are not public figures, lol and some rabble rounsing ex-hippies in norther california are.