News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.
My former colleagues at another university in Middle East have also been moved to online teaching indefinitely, with the students…
If much of the interest of high-quality papers lies between the lines—in the metaphorical fire that a paper lights in…
I would also recommend that potential grad students make inquiries into how far the compensation package actually goes towards cost…
It’s a mix. I’m still in the UAE with my family, and we feel safe. But some students and faculty…
In the above comment, Michel wrote: “As an aside, every once in a while I check out how the chatbots…
I could imagine LLMs having saved me a *ton* of time in graduate school–e.g., by having supplied reasonable answers to…
The McMaster Department of Philosophy has now put together the following notice commemorating Barry: Barry Allen: A Philosophical Life Barry…
Who exactly has standing to complain of defamation here? What am I missing? (I haven't read the complaints, I should add, I am just going off the news story.)
Whether or not the defamation causes of action are mispleaded, the complaints also include counts of tortious interference with business relations. The complaints themselves are on Cooley’s website at http://www.cooley.edu/newsevents/_docs/2011_07_14_Summons_and_Complaint_startpage.pdf and http://www.cooley.edu/newsevents/_docs/2011_07_014_Summons_and_Complaint_startpage.pdf
A corporation can be a defamation plaintiff. See, e.g., Restatement (Second) of Torts section 561.
BL COMMENT: Thanks, I didn’t realize the Cooley Law School was incorporated.
The problem is going to be damages. Since this is a business, the tort is injurious falsehood (restatement’s name for it). Though an individual in this case could claim this is defamation per se, and thereby get presumed damages, a business needs to establish pecuniary damages. Even if enrollment is down at Cooley, it would be difficult to show a link between the activity of these bloggers and the reduced enrollment.
Cosign Beau. I don’t have data on injurious falsehood claiming but defamation is exceedingly tough for plaintiffs. The recurring paradigm is win at trial (if the judge lets the plaintiff over the “special damages” hurdle and doesn’t dismiss), lose on appeal. Cooley has next to zero chance of collecting a penny. It’s probably hoping for some kind of non-monetary victory. It won’t get that either.
Don’t they really want an injunction? Bloggers do not have money; the firm might – but it is really difficult to calculate damages in a case like this.
Leave a Reply