morto@piefed.social 8 hours ago
It would be nice if he decides to sue ars technica for that. Writers and publisher need to learn the hard way that you can’t use ai and trust that for publishing stuff that needs factual coherence. If not by ethics, let it be from fear of lawsuits.
tempest@lemmy.ca 7 hours ago
Sue them for what? He would have to prove damages and they took it down.
underisk@lemmy.ml 7 hours ago
Libel. Taking it down doesn’t undo the damage to reputation which libel is concerned with.
tempest@lemmy.ca 6 hours ago
As much as I would like to see that happen paying to fight a court case against Conde Nast just to get a retraction that they will stick somewhere invisible doesn’t really sound like a winning formula.
underisk@lemmy.ml 6 hours ago
Letting them win because you’ve canceled before even playing is also a losing formula. Even if they don’t get awarded monetary damages they can probably at least get their legal expenses covered.
Frenchgeek@lemmy.ml 4 hours ago
How about getting them to put an “e” after the “s” in their name instead?
morto@piefed.social 7 hours ago
Publicly making false statements using his name isn’t a crime by itself in his jurisdiction?
tempest@lemmy.ca 6 hours ago
No, there are a bunch of things required to be met in the US for libel and a bunch of precedent which is why it’s hard to sue for it and succeed
en.wikipedia.org/…/United_States_defamation_law