Canadian fined $35,000 for hurting feelings *Update, Jokes won.

[amdorintel]

10 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

im 29. so im a millennial.

ok boomer

LOL

 

i love how this all comes down to name calling

which I did, but I was being sarcastic

dont be offended

 

[RonnieOP]

8 minutes ago, amdorintel said:

ok boomer

LOL

 

i love how this all comes down to name calling

which I did, but I was being sarcastic

dont be offended

 

yeah i can tell your joking around.

 

The other user on the hand doesnt have a valid argument though so they resort to the "boomer" meme.

 

Its not even debatable that this generation are soft. They want to have the "right" to not be offended. and they want everything handed to them.

 

 

[RonnieOP]

1 hour ago, FezBoy said:

Sounds like slander to me, and last I checked slander is illegal.

 

But I'm not a lawyer, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Reason it shouldnt be slander is because it was part of a comedy act. Comedy acts are fiction. No joke should be taken as factual.

[Donut417]

On 12/4/2019 at 12:36 PM, JZStudios said:

Ward’s jokes make have been tasteless, but does that mean he should have to pay $35,000?

Its called Defamation of Character. If the victim had harm come to his person or his reputation then he would have a case. Also freedom of speech is more of a protection from the Govenrment rather than protection aginst individuals. Its kinda like atleast in the US, employers can at any time do a search of your locker (unless outlawed by state laws), but Public employees (Government employees) they would require a warrant to do any searches. 

[Praesi]

I am totaly against this sjw gender hatespeech BS thats going on. But this case doesnt realy sound it belongs in that category.

[JZStudios]

17 hours ago, handymanshandle said:

What in the FUCK happened here to where this thread wound up with 300 replies?

Arguments over freedom of speech and how people want it restricted, and whether or not a joke said during a comedy act is in fact a joke and not slander.

 

16 hours ago, RonnieOP said:

yeah i can tell your joking around.

 

The other user on the hand doesnt have a valid argument though so they resort to the "boomer" meme.

Sauron has no argument. He claimed that I keep changing my opinion, despite the fact that I've repeated myself a fair few times and posted videos supporting my view, but they were pretty much all from the fascist wearing a commie hat, so I'm assuming he didn't watch them. Then he called me a 4 year old.

Then he said punching down shouldn't be allowed, but disagreed that you should only be able to punch up. 

In other news, I'll just wait a few weeks until that stupid meme dies. Apparently boomers are 25-30 year olds who actually work for money and don't cry at every challenge instead of people born in the late 40's or 50's.

13 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Its called Defamation of Character. If the victim had harm come to his person or his reputation then he would have a case. Also freedom of speech is more of a protection from the Govenrment rather than protection aginst individuals. Its kinda like atleast in the US, employers can at any time do a search of your locker (unless outlawed by state laws), but Public employees (Government employees) they would require a warrant to do any searches. 

It's not called defamation of character for 2 distinct reasons,

1. It was a joke.

2. The case had no mention nor anything to do with defamation.

 

As an aside, Elon Musk was acquitted of defamation charges against that diver he repeatedly called a pedophile and actually hired a private investigator to try and dig up dirt, even saying the only reason he was in (Taiwan I think) was because he was looking for a child to marry.

So... this guy says a joke ON STAGE in the middle of an act, and he's charged with impeding someones right to freedom of expression somehow, whatever the fuck that means, but repeatedly calling someone a pedophile on social media, news outlets, interviews, etc. and hiring a P.I. isn't defamation. Does that add up to you? Because it sure as fuck doesn't to me.

 

I mean... "Infringing his right to equality"

 

[amdorintel]

6 hours ago, JZStudios said:

So... this guy says a joke ON STAGE in the middle of an act, and he's charged with impeding someones right to freedom of expression somehow, whatever the fuck that means, but repeatedly calling someone a pedophile on social media, news outlets, interviews, etc. and hiring a P.I. isn't defamation. Does that add up to you? Because it sure as fuck doesn't to me.

well for one, you are comparing the USA to Canada, but not only Canada, the province of Quebec within Canada has different laws then the rest of the provinces in Canada.

[Donut417]

6 hours ago, JZStudios said:

Does that add up to you?

Ones is a comedian the other is RICH. Rich people can pretty much get away with murder at this point. 

[JZStudios]

6 hours ago, amdorintel said:

well for one, you are comparing the USA to Canada, but not only Canada, the province of Quebec within Canada has different laws then the rest of the provinces in Canada.

I wasn't comparing anything. It's two separate cases about different topics. One was a defamation case, the other was.. freedom of expression, whatever that means.

 

5 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Ones is a comedian the other is RICH. Rich people can pretty much get away with murder at this point. 

Only politicians. Didn't work so well for Bill Cosby or Weinstein.

[Mooshi]

Comics not aimed at children are supposed to be assholes. The art of standup is to say things to get a rise out of the crowd. Hell, even Jeff Dunham with his puppets will tell adult jokes.

 

This was also Quebec which I'd say is the equivalent to Florida in the US as in why does it exist lol

[RasmusDC]

Why is freedom of speech always used as an excuse to be an twat, YES freedom of speech is important, but you also have to be responsible for your actions.

 

as stated earlier it seems that this is based on the comic altering the truth and actually lying about the kid, and slandering him, that is not legal.

 

if you hide behind freedom of speech, then on person could just make up shit about linus, acting wierd around kids, and killing his lively hood, that is also why many celebrities actually wins cases against news outlets..

 

we have so many cases in Denmark, where the mother claims the father to be a poor parent to get the full rights to the child after a divorce. in many of the cases it ends up being shown that it is not factual just lying, that is also not legal, or stating that you have been raped, when you have not.

 

COMICS are not .. "free" to do whatever they want, and therefor damage other peoples life, so if all that has been stated about the actual story is correct, then he should pay for deformation, and seriously learn to actually delivery some comic relief without slandering people, and going after the weakest parts of sociaty.

 

seriously i really hate these guys, and i am from a country where we love too make fun of eachother, in a really dark way.

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, RasmusDC said:

i am from a country where we love too make fun of eachother, in a really dark way.

You say that as if it makes you some type of authority on what is okay for humor.

[RasmusDC]

3 hours ago, Drak3 said:

You say that as if it makes you some type of authority on what is okay for humor.

Not at all, just stating that you can make fun of eachother, without degrading or plain telling lies... just trying to state that i am not fragile in mind

[Drak3]

8 minutes ago, RasmusDC said:

Not at all, just stating that you can make fun of eachother, without degrading or plain telling lies... just trying to state that i am not fragile in mind

Defamation isn’t the issue here, that’s been well established at this point.

[amdorintel]

2 hours ago, RasmusDC said:

Not at all, just stating that you can make fun of eachother, without degrading or plain telling lies... just trying to state that i am not fragile in mind

in that case, every single joke is a lie

thinking through it more, how would you know if something thats been said is really what happened.

that is the dilemma

[JZStudios]

11 hours ago, Mooshi said:

Comics not aimed at children are supposed to be assholes. The art of standup is to say things to get a rise out of the crowd. Hell, even Jeff Dunham with his puppets will tell adult jokes.

 

This was also Quebec which I'd say is the equivalent to Florida in the US as in why does it exist lol

To be a safe haven for Cubans and college students? Or retirement homes?

 

7 hours ago, RasmusDC said:

Why is freedom of speech always used as an excuse to be an twat, YES freedom of speech is important, but you also have to be responsible for your actions.

 

as stated earlier it seems that this is based on the comic altering the truth and actually lying about the kid, and slandering him, that is not legal.

There was no truth, that's why it's a joke. He could've also stated the kid sucked helium and began to float.

Also, it wasn't a defamation case.

7 hours ago, RasmusDC said:

if you hide behind freedom of speech, then on person could just make up shit about linus, acting wierd around kids, and killing his lively hood, that is also why many celebrities actually wins cases against news outlets..

That depends. I'm sure someone does somewhere, but compensation for defamation has actual values, not a random number pulled from a hat or the Wheel of Fortune. Those statements presumably also wouldn't be occurring during the middle of a stand up act.

There's rules that must be met to claim defamation, at least in the US, and not one of them is "Told a joke during a comedy act."

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/defamation-law-made-simple-29718.html

7 hours ago, RasmusDC said:

we have so many cases in Denmark, where the mother claims the father to be a poor parent to get the full rights to the child after a divorce. in many of the cases it ends up being shown that it is not factual just lying, that is also not legal, or stating that you have been raped, when you have not.

Those aren't jokes. I could be wrong about globally, but usually the mother ends up with the children regardless, unless she's heavily in debt or has no job or something. But at least in the US the man is pretty much forced to pay child care for the next however many years until the child is 18.

Citing that someone raped you when the information is false moves into actual pre-established law, but only for wasting police time or resources.

7 hours ago, RasmusDC said:

COMICS are not .. "free" to do whatever they want, and therefor damage other peoples life, so if all that has been stated about the actual story is correct, then he should pay for deformation, and seriously learn to actually delivery some comic relief without slandering people, and going after the weakest parts of sociaty.

 

seriously i really hate these guys, and i am from a country where we love too make fun of eachother, in a really dark way.

It wasn't defamation, and there was no cited defamation in the case. I don't know why everyone sticks onto it being defamation.

[JZStudios]

2 minutes ago, comander said:

There needs to be an audit for bias. 

For a second I thought you were going to pull a 180 and say there needs to be an audit for Jews.

[JZStudios]

Good news! The Canadian Supreme court has voted in favor of Mike Ward and all charges are dropped. Though it was a close call of 4-5, which is still nucking futs to me.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mike-ward-scc-jérémy-gabriel-1.6229032

[IPD]

When humor goes--all hope is lost; it is the bellwether of freedom.

 

p.s.

As the apocryphal quote attributed to Josef Stalin goes "Dark Humor is like food--not everyone gets it"

[JZStudios]

1 hour ago, IPD said:

As the apocryphal quote attributed to Josef Stalin goes "Dark Humor is like food--not everyone gets it"

"Buy a man eat fish, he day, teach fish man, to a lifetime." - Joe Biden

 

I can't believe this, but I absolutely fucking love that AP fact checked that. What a bunch of maroons.

https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-afs:Content:9945191104

[HenrySalayne]

On 10/30/2021 at 8:09 PM, JZStudios said:

Good news! The Canadian Supreme court has voted in favor of Mike Ward and all charges are dropped. Though it was a close call of 4-5, which is still nucking futs to me.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mike-ward-scc-jérémy-gabriel-1.6229032

There is a fine line between freedom of speech and defamation. I'm not familiar with Canadian law but in this particular case it is probably the latter. Generally speaking, it is a good thing someone can take legal steps against someone else spreading (degrading or false) claims.

[IPD]

It's not defamation.  It's literally just another chapter of how comedy is an endangered species because the outrage olympics are still at fever pitch.

[HenrySalayne]

1 minute ago, IPD said:

It's literally just another chapter of how comedy is an endangered species because the outrage olympics are still at fever pitch.

Cry me a river. If you need defaming "alternative facts" (AKA lies) about a person to make a joke work, the joke was not worth telling in the first place. And if a person doesn't fit your joke, don't make this person the protagonist of your joke. Instead of "IPD walks into a strip club" you can simply start with "a guy walks into a strip club". If the person is not important for the joke, why even put them in there?

15 minutes ago, IPD said:

It's not defamation.

I beg to differ:

Quote

While the court ruled that Gabriel's right to live in dignity was not breached, it said that does not mean that he was without recourse.

"Mr. Gabriel could have invoked the protection against harassment provided for in ... the charter because of the fact that he had been bullied," said the ruling. "He could also have brought an action in defamation."

The court pointed out, however, that the Quebec human rights tribunal has no jurisdiction over matters of defamation. 

 

[IPD]

2 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

Cry me a river. If you need defaming "alternative facts" (AKA lies) about a person to make a joke work, the joke was not worth telling in the first place. And if a person doesn't fit your joke, don't make this person the protagonist of your joke. Instead of "IPD walks into a strip club" you can simply start with "a guy walks into a strip club". If the person is not important for the joke, why even put them in there?

I beg to differ:

 

According to your definition, the bulk of US media outlets should be paying billions of dollars of damages for defamation to the previous administration, its' employees, etc.

 

Rules for thee, not for me?

 

p.s.

"Bringing action in defamation" is not the same as "legally an airtight case of defamation".  Suits get filed all the time.  Doesn't mean they hold water.  Some are just vindictive--like how Apple sunk HTC as a smartphone company via preliminary injunction.  Every courts system will have flaws.  I really don't want to exacerbate that by knee-jerk "trust the victim".

[Rybo]

17 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

There is a fine line between freedom of speech and defamation. I'm not familiar with Canadian law but in this particular case it is probably the latter. Generally speaking, it is a good thing someone can take legal steps against someone else spreading (degrading or false) claims.

True.  

Being a comedian doing a comedy sketch on a stage dedicated to performing comedy is nowhere near that line.  Frankly, it's not even freedom of speech.  It's just comedy.  

 

It's a shame that such a case existed at all, much less made it to the Supreme Court.  It's a travesty of justice that it won out so narrowly.