2025 RationalWiki 'Oregon Plan' Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff—we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!
Donations so far: $5273.29Goal: $10000

Talk:McLibel trial

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

i seem to recall that McDonalds also accidentally libelled Morris and Steel, allowing the two to sue McD's in turn.

Truth not a defense in Britain?[edit]

Libel laws pretty much everywhere else require that a statement be a) written, b) defamatory and c) not true, whereas British libel law requires only A and B. So...

My understanding is that truth is a defense against libel in Britain, it's just that a judge lets the case proceed that the defendants have to prove that what they said is true, rather than the plaintiff having to prove what they said is false. Take for example the Irving v Lipstadt trial, where the defendant won by proving what she said was true. -- Matthew Cline (talk) 04:45, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Rewrite[edit]

Why is this article formatted in bullet points rather than prose? БaбyЛuigiOнФire🚓(T|C) 02:11, 9 January 2018 (UTC)