Status Update On Niemann Litigation

@polylogarithmique said in #19:
> Now how would you feel if an influent member of ypur community started saying that? And maybe everyone would start looking at you funny and local stlres would refuse to sell you stuff?

It doesnt matter how i feel. The law is clear, free speech is protected, and as long as the person has not made an accusation, its not illegal. My feelings are irrelevant in that case.

If others act on behalf of an opinion, the one who made the opinion is not responsible either, as he didnt called for action. In that case, the one who acted may suffer legal consequences if it broke any law.

Some opinions may be sensitive or controversial and may alter how people feel about you, others or any given situation, so one must be wary of said opinions. Magnus probably has more inside information or there could be other factors that compelled him to act the way he did, which im sure, he didnt took lightly. But at the end of the day, it is still an opinion. He never accused anything. He only said that he thinks that Hans cheated and that tournament organizers should increase security to discourage it. Mass media are the ones saying that Carlsen accused Hans with their headlights, as in "CARLSEN ACCUSED HANS OF CHEATING" or among the lines. He didnt.

"By Greg Keener
Published Sept. 28, 2022Updated Sept. 30, 2022

The chess world has been shaken by a cheating accusation at the highest level of play since Magnus Carlsen’s loss to Hans Niemann at the Sinquefield Cup on Sept. 4"

www.nytimes.com/2022/09/28/crosswords/hans-niemann-magnus-carlsen-cheating-update.html

"Chess world champion Magnus Carlsen accuses Hans Niemann of cheating"
"One week after stunning the chess world by resigning from a game after making just one move, reigning world champion Magnus Carlsen has broken his silence to accuse Hans Niemann, 19, of cheating."

www.npr.org/2022/09/27/1125316142/chess-magnus-carlsen-hans-niemann-cheating

"Magnus Carlsen publicly accuses Hans Niemann of more cheating"
"Magnus Carlsen has broken his silence on the scandal that has rocked chess by accusing Hans Niemann of cheating more – and more recently – than he has publicly admitted."

"Chess world champion Magnus Carlsen explicitly accuses rival Hans Niemann of cheating "
"Chess world champion Magnus Carlsen released a statement confirming his accusations of cheating against rival and fellow chess grandmaster Hans Niemann on Monday. "

edition.cnn.com/2022/09/26/sport/chess-cheating-accusation-by-magnus-carlsen

And this is Magnus actual statement.

twitter.com/MagnusCarlsen/status/1574482694406565888/photo/1

@Alientcp said in #11:
>He only said that he thinks that Hans cheated and that tournament organizers should increase security to discourage it. Mass media are the ones saying that Carlsen accused Hans with their headlights, as in "CARLSEN ACCUSED HANS OF CHEATING" or among the lines. He didnt.

>the one who made the opinion is not responsible either, as he didnt called for action.

From Magnus statement "I believe that Niemann has cheated more- and more recently -than he has publicly admitted. His over the board progress has been unusual, and throughout our game in the Sinquefield Cup I had the impression that he wasn't tense or even fully concentrating on the game in critical positions, while outplaying me as black in a way I think only a handful or players can do. This game contributed to changing my perspective.
We must do something about cheating, and for my part going forward, I don’t want to play against people that have cheated...I have only been able been able to speak with my actions, and those actions have stated clearly that I am not willing to play chess with Niemann."
Do you think this is not an accusation?

@Alientcp it doesn't matter if you uwe a cautionary "I believe" or not. The very reason of making slander and defamation illegal (whic is a restriction of "free speech" anyway) is so that innocent individuals don't have to face the material consequences I evoked in my previous post. Not just for the fun of forbidding-formal-accusations-but-not-stuff-that-are-not-formal-accusation.

Since using "I believe" or "I think that" does not make these consequences less likely to occur, it must follow that any well-made law wouldn't exempt a speech from being defamation just because it used "I believe" or "I think".

@Alientcp said in #21:
> It doesnt matter how i feel. The law is clear, free speech is protected, and as long as the person has not made an accusation, its not illegal. My feelings are irrelevant in that case.
>
> If others act on behalf of an opinion, the one who made the opinion is not responsible either, as he didnt called for action. In that case, the one who acted may suffer legal consequences if it broke any law.

If you believe your own words, then, as an example of proof, go to your nearest colored police officer and execute your protected right to free speech, by saying nice comments about his skin, ancestry and his mom by using "I believe" or "I have the impression".

Ok that is a shitty example. But I don't believe in magic words, which protect you from any legal consequences.

@polylogarithmique said in #23:

> it doesn't matter if you uwe a cautionary "I believe" or not.

This is absolutely correct and, as I pointed out earlier in this thread, has been confirmed by two lawyers who are regular posters on this forum. The information is also easily found by using one of those new-fangled "search engines" I believe you young people use on this here interweb. Try Gaggle, or whatever it's called.

Maybe it's my age, but I find it very disheartening that such a simple legal point, easily discovered with a teenchy weenchy bit of research (it's on this forum for Godsake!) is so misunderstood by some, and then defended to the hilt. This legal case is going to be complex, and the outcome uncertain, but this is one point of law that isn't really in contention.

@ClayAndSilence I agree. My main point is that not only that is de facto how the law is, but it is also very reasonable that the law is this way and not the other way, and that it hasn't anything to do with free speech.

@polylogarithmique said in #26:
> @ClayAndSilence I agree. My main point is that not only that is de facto how the law is, but it is also very reasonable that the law is this way and not the other way, and that it hasn't anything to do with free speech.
True, but one must also consider that proving defamation is easier in some jurisdictions than in others. For example, it is much easier to make your libel case in UK court than in US jurisdictions.

@Nomoreusernames said in #22:
> Do you think this is not an accusation?

Yes.

@polylogarithmique
>Since using "I believe" or "I think that" does not make these consequences less likely to occur, it must follow that any well-made law wouldn't exempt a speech from being defamation just because it used "I believe" or "I think".

He only explained why he acted the way he did. I dont see anywhere in his statement to act against Niemann.

Sure, there were some consequences, but thats other people acting on their own.

I do not see any problems with the way the law is written, and i think Carlsen is not liable.
I cannot say the same from the whole lo, as they twisted the statement.

@new_player_123
Believe it or not, i would not be facing legal consequences.
However, i said that you should be wary of said statements. I would probably get my ass wooped, but i certainly would not face defamation charges. He would just make some bs ones, like resisting, obstruction or among the lines.

@Nomoreusernames said in #22:
>Do you think this is not an accusation?

@Alientcp said in #28:
> Yes.

Read carefully:
"throughout our game in the Sinquefield Cup ... This game contributed to changing my perspective.
We must do something about cheating ...I have only been able been able to speak with my actions, and those actions have stated clearly that I am not willing to play chess with Niemann."

Do you think that someone reasonable and without bias, would think that this may be an accusation and a call to action?

You boys can play your silly word games all you want but if the case makes it to trial (with a jury) then Hans can expect a nice, fat settlement. There's a reason they specified a jury trial.