Internet libel, again

But we'll surely be seeing more cases like this one about Tucker Max and Miss Vermont, and Steinbuch v. Cutler and such as blogging gets more popular.

"Internet libel: what’s fair game to publish in YOUR blog?" by Sandi Spino, The Setonian

My favorite part (and which I think makes total sense):

Callan explained truth is the ultimate defense in a libel case such as the one between Max and Johnson.

No matter how horrible or destructive published material may be to a person, it is no grounds for a lawsuit if it is true, Callan said.

I see no reason why anyone should not be able to write about things that actually happened. Yes, the truth may hurt (ahem, I am so restraining myself from using the person in question's initials, but, yes, "I'm not a bad person"), but that's why I think that if you don't like what someone may write about you, maybe you should conduct yourself in a manner you'd want to be written about. I am not perfect by any means and fuck up all the time, but I do try to treat people well and fairly. I can't control what people say or write about me, and I don't try to - but I do think part of being an adult is being able to accept that everyone will have an opinion, and some of us may write about them, and it's perfectly within our First Amendment rights to do so. If these types of cases wind up succeeding, I pity the future of literature, memoir, and personal blogging. Not to mention sex columns.