7.26.2008
Stage Magic and Litigation
The Law and Magic blog's coverage of a recent ruling concerning a defamation lawsuit against Magic Magazine, and an angry magician, caught my eye. What does the world of stage magic have to do with practitioners of Paganism? As it turns out, quite a bit, at least in my opinion. The case involved Magic Magazine's review of a card trick magician Bill Nagler was selling, in short, the review wasn't favorable.
"The Court noted that the plaintiff, Mr. Nagler, alleged two causes of action, defamation and product disparagement, against Mr. Henderson, and the publisher of Magic Magazine. Mr. Nagler apparently thought that Mr. Henderson "bought in" to the notion that Mr. Nagler was guilty of exposing the secrets behind other magicians' tricks and thus wrote a negative review. He accused Mr. Henderson of making false statements of fact concerning the magic trick under review. Mr. Henderson and Magic Magazine defended by saying that the statements were protected opinion, and also that they did not "concern" Mr. Nagler."
The court, in its wisdom, rejected the accusations of defamation and disparagement.
"The Court examined the statements to which Mr. Nagler objected and said that they were either 'rhetorical hyberbole' or unverifiable 'supported interpretation.'"
So why is this important to us? Aren't there loads of legal precedents protecting negative reviews? What is important is the circumstances and language used. While couched in the world of stage magic, this case reminded me of the many negative reviews I've read of "magickal" books by authors like Silver RavenWolf, Douglas Monroe, and Ed Fitch. In fact, I'm surprised we haven't seen some vengeful Pagan/occult author let fly with a lawsuit with charges almost identical to the ones seen here . Oath-bound material, wounded egos, and "massaged" facts are certainly found in both communities.
The court's decision that 'rhetorical hyberbole', even if it is insulting or unkind, is protected so long as the opinions are grounded by 'supported interpretation' of facts should be welcome news to any Pagan magazine or web site that regularly publishes reviews. In other words, you can say things like this...
"Personally, I believe one of the biggest problems we face today is Silver Ravenwolf. Particularly ironic is the fact that the "Craft Code of Honor" that she displays on her own website includes "Respect the religion of others." So she's a bigot and a hypocrite."
And you should be protected under the law so long as you support your interpretation with facts (as you see them) that led you to that opinion. That doesn't mean that the target of your negative review can't file a lawsuit, it just means he or she isn't likely to win.
Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
