Quote:
Originally Posted by Poet Laureate
Wrong on so many levels, but the simplest and most basic reason it wouldn't work is this: Dirty Hands. In order to show that she was financially harmed by a bad review, a provider would have to submit tax records. And since she is not reporting the income, the case would be thrown out. Judges are not going to allow you (the provider) to say "Your honor, I've been cheating on my income tax by not reporting what I make providing, but he cost me money, so punish him." Rather, the judge will admonish you: "Don't come to my Court with dirty hands (cheating the IRS) and expect to find justice."
-
There's also the little problem of being forced to swear under oath that you routinely engage in illegal activities. How credible do you think a jury will find you?
|
(1) Isn't civil court and tax court different courts?? Can one court take the jurisdiction of another. Besides, only the IRS or a state taxing authority can bring a tax suit for under reported income.
(2) The provider may not have to submit tax records since there may be other reasons for a reduction income such as a bad economy, reduction in service and prices, etc.
(3) Couldn't the provider submit records such as phone records showing a reduction in phone calls, damage to reputation, stigma, etc. A hedonic model coud be used to estimate the damage by internet defamation and control for the economy, etc. Same type of model used for real estate disputes.
In general, internet defamation suits are on the rise. Free speech means the government cannot censor you, but Free Speech does not mean you protected for the consequences from your speech. You can't scream "Fire" in a crowded theatre unless there really is a fire.
