slander involves spoken statements
libel addresses written statements
defamation encompasses both written and verbal statements
"The Court declared that the First Amendment protects open and robust debate on public issues even when such debate includes "vehement, caustic, unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials." A public official or other plaintiff who has voluntarily assumed a position in the public eye must prove that defamatory statements were made with knowledge that they were false or with reckless disregard of whether they were false."
DNDN cannot prove that their actions (or lack thereof) have been anything but a disaster for the company and shareholders. SA is a media publication and can claim "fair comment" exclusions under the 1st amendment and it would be equally difficult to prove libel against any anonymous poster here, given the overwhelming amount of trash (misinformation, lies) posted by pumpers and underwater retail longs.
i believe DNDN management is more focused on trying to save this company (which will probably involve a massive secondary) and their own jobs, not wasting their time and legal efforts to satisfy the desperate and disturbed retail investors who were too ignorant to read a financial statement.
Marie Huber & Jones might be able to invoke the 1st Amendment, per your reasoning, Pedo ! Tell that to the SEC.
And YOU, yourself, Pedo. "i believe DNDN management is more focused on trying to save this company (which will probably involve a massive secondary) and their own jobs", may have the same fate spreading malicious rumors for your own financial gain.