Hacker News Reader

In the U.S., there is a very high bar to accuse defamation. You not only need to prove the report is false, you also need to prove the reporter knew it was false and had bad intention to cause damage.

View on HN

That's defamation, but not libel. For clearing libel, all you have to prove is that the statement was presented as fact, was false, and caused harm.

From my lay understanding, Supermicro has a slam dunk case given the impact on their stock price.

For clearing libel, all you have to prove is that the statement was presented as fact, was false, and caused harm.

At least in the US, I don't think this is true. Defamation is a broader class that includes libel, and always requires proving that the publisher was at least "negligent" in publishing the false statement: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation

You either have to know the fact is false, or act with reckless disregard as to whether it's false or not. 17 sources suggests that they did care whether it was true; if they didn't care, they would not have gone to all the effort.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com