Dealing with defamation

Melania Trump files suit in Maryland:

The original complaint filed in Maryland Circuit Court focused on an Aug. 19 Daily Mail article entitled, “Naked photoshoots, and troubling questions about visas that won’t go away: The VERY racy past of Donald Trump’s Slovenian wife.”

“The statements of fact in the Daily Mail Article are false. Plaintiff did legitimate and legal modeling work for legitimate business entities and did not work for any ‘gentleman’s club’ or ‘escort’ agencies. Plaintiff was not a sex worker, escort or prostitute in any way, shape or form, nor did she ever have a composite or presentation card for the sex business,” the lawsuit said.

“Plaintiff did not come to the United States until 1996. Thus, Plaintiff did not, and could not have participated in a photo shoot in the United States or met her current husband in the United States prior to that time,” the lawsuit also said.

So, she’s considerably more of a public figure than I am, the accusation is less harmful, and she doesn’t even have multiple examples of documentary evidence of malice on the part of the accused demonstrated over an extended period of time.

And yet, the Daily Mail is likely going to try to settle.

Meanwhile, keep in mind the owner of Amazing Stories attitude toward lawsuits before you defend his right to engage to defend defamatory practices:

I don’t want to become an industry that threatens to sue everyone improperly using the name, but I also have a duty to my licensing partners to preserve and protect it. Right now I am spending what little free cash I have on IP attorneys. The research they are doing will determine who we go after and how; we’re still trying to decide whether to get settlements from “little guys” first, or go after a big kahuna first. The latter is potentially more attractive for a variety of reasons – publicity, the potential winnings (some have already been informed of their infringement and have chosen to ignore that notice, which means they could be up for treble damages) and the possibility of making things better for many others who find themselves in similar circumstances; going after little guys first is usually done to help build a case against the larger guys, but it usually involves a lot of what some might call “intimidation” and I’m not that comfortable with that. But in the end the attorneys are going to tell me what our best course will be and we’ll pursue it.

Steve Davidson was obviously quite comfortable with engaging in lawfare when he thought it suited him. And he already knows he has a little problem on his hands here.

anyone having access to good information to defamation and anti-nazi laws in EU countries, please get in touch with me

It’s rather depressing to learn that a guy whose wife was diagnosed with cancer in April prefers to spend his time and financial resources on defamation rather than on her, but, as the Austrians say, all value is subjective. What is wrong with these people?

Anyhow, it would certainly be amusing to end up in possession of the Amazing Stories trademark as a result of all this. We’ve already been reviewing an example of case law with $235k in damages for defamation alone in New Hampshire, an award that was appealed and upheld. Considering that I am an editor and publisher of leading Jewish and Israeli authors, including two books coming out in the next four months, it should be readily apparent that Mr. Davidson’s publication of Ms Meadow’s defamatory claim was both wanton and malicious.

Interestingly enough, one of those authors is even considered a world expert on fascism, having written one of the foremost academic treatments of it.

Right now, the bulk of Experimenter’s budget is being spent on intellectual property attorneys. 

No worries, we can fix that.