So imagine I combine some niche industry terms to call you something nasty - say, "init forker" - and make it a statement of fact, though one that's hard to discern even for insiders, much less for the general audience. But it so happens that you're an influencer on the side. You make an angry Tiktok video whining about me. Then someone in your audience makes a YouTube commentary about it. Then someone else makes a counter-commentary. Fast forward one week, half the population in the country knows what "init forker" means.
Would this give you grounds for an effective libel suit? Even if it only became "matters of common knowledge rationally attributable to all reasonable persons" after the fact, thanks to third parties making the story viral on the Internet?
Yes the legal system in CA requires that at least one person other than the person being insulted here understands it is a defamatory statement made in writing for a a libel per quod case. It doesn't require the general public or a theoretical reasonable person would understand it, but then as a practical matter unless many who received the message understand it the damages would be minimal and it wouldn't be worth a civil case.
And it still needs to meet all the other requirements, the statement needs to be provably false. Not just an opinion, not a substantially true statement, that the statements were made(in writing) to someone other than who they were about, there were actual damages and they damages were substantially caused by the libelous writing. Showing actual damages in a defamation case is hard
I don't know, but it's a great reason not to expand libel law. Especially in an age where everything is permanently recorded but the sequence of events is increasingly elided.
So imagine I combine some niche industry terms to call you something nasty - say, "init forker" - and make it a statement of fact, though one that's hard to discern even for insiders, much less for the general audience. But it so happens that you're an influencer on the side. You make an angry Tiktok video whining about me. Then someone in your audience makes a YouTube commentary about it. Then someone else makes a counter-commentary. Fast forward one week, half the population in the country knows what "init forker" means.
Would this give you grounds for an effective libel suit? Even if it only became "matters of common knowledge rationally attributable to all reasonable persons" after the fact, thanks to third parties making the story viral on the Internet?