Think nothing can be done about the defamation "comments"? Think again -
New York courts : ruled that as long as an opinion relied on accurately stated and reported facts, it was not actionable as long as the content, tone and apparent purpose of the statement distinguished it as opinion. This privilege does not apply, however, to any accusations of criminal or illegal activity.
Illinois courts : require that the factual basis of the statement be clearly disclosed. Any statement of opinion without underlying facts is to be treated as a factual assertion per se. If it implies the existence of undisclosed facts which are false and defamatory, it is actionable. False statements of fact couched in an opinion context are actionable unless clearly set aside by "loose, figurative or hyperbolic language."
Texas courts :opinions that imply false statements of objective fact were held by at least one court to be unprotected, and it declared that there was no opinion privilege in Texas.
California courts : no categorical exception for opinion exists independently under California law," joining its federal counterparts in rejecting an opinion privilege. A lower court later articulated a similar standard to Illinois's for distinguishing opinion from fact, relying on use of language and provability.
In other words, defamatory accusations in print are actionable regardless of whether they are an "opinion" or not. There has to be factual and provable information or it is libelous and actionable. Few if any of the defamatory "opinions" issued by Bezek are either factual OR provable so he best be looking for counsel because the law will be coming for him - almost guaranteed.
Why do you think Ian got is high school buddy to write the follow-up article from his dorm room?! Ian is trying to cover his tracks and make it seem like there are others that share his opinion; however, if one were to investigate, they would quickly find that these "facts" are all coming from one place.
Ian...beware...you have already cost me about $15K...what's another $15K to see you sit in jail for a while?!!! You had better throw the computer that you've been doing all of your correspondence away, b/c it will be easy for the investigators to uncover your dealings with the big boyz. Once that is confirmed, you are TOAST!!!
To the others on this board that think that Ian will never find a job...you couldn't be more wrong. Ian already has a job and it's probably paying more than I make in a year.
Who knows what he might be promised by the big boys if he can successfully pull off this highly profitable short raid?You might be begging him for a loan someday.They might be able to hide from the law,but they would have a more difficult time hiding from a good attorney.Class action lawsuits are frequently successful.I have recovered damages from some of these before.It would be pretty easy to show damages in this case,and have a good shot at recovering some of that from whoever is paying him.I say we go for it,while the trail is hot.Feel free to contact me.
In this state,Colorado,two basic things are required.1)The statements are made with the intent to cause harm.2)The person making the statements knows at the time the statements are made that they are false.This second requirement can be difficult to prove,as all the person has to say is that they believed the statements to be true.I was a plaintiff right here in Colorado and battled hard to get to a draw.The defendant was far better funded than me, however.I believe to this day that I might have prevailed but I was running out of money for this purpose and I was able to achieve the somewhat limited victory of getting the actions stopped.I believe a better course of legal action might be the RICO laws.If the defendant is profiting expressly by causing harm to an innocent party that is racketeering. The First Amendment does not protect racketeers.Gaining profit by unlawful interference of a lawful business through expressed or implied threats is what would need to be shown.This too would be difficult to pursue as it would be complex,but might also apply .
take a look at what a sharp , market mover we are dealing with, I think junior has had his day in the sun leave the poor kid alone , no one will ever take him seriously now..... linkedin.com/in/ianbezek
Good post. I emailed Yongye urging them to sue both Bezek and Seeking Alpha. This is clearly libel - almost the exact definition since illegal activity is stated but not proven and the company and it's shareholders have suffered greatly from the mis-statements of fact. A lawsuit is justified and necessary to prevent these snakes from striking again whenever and at whomever they please. There have to be consequences for this sort of thing.