Author John Scalzi recently dealt with someone spreading a false rumor that he is a “self-confessed rapist”. John posted a response here. (Trigger Warning: His post itself contains a trigger warning for rape.) John is a fantastic writer–I recommend Old Man’s War–so it’s no surprise that his response is well crafted. In particular, he pens this great line:
6. Aside from writing this to clarify matters, I don’t intend to do anything about Beale continuing to assert I have confessed to being a rapist. I could bring a libel suit against him, on the idea that accusing me of confessing to rape is defamation, it’s an untrue assertion, and Beale knows it’s untrue and continues to assert it anyway, for malicious purposes (the latter being important as I am likely to be considered a public individual at this point). However, I would also need to show that Beale’s actions have caused me harm, economically and/or emotionally. Aside from annoyance, which does not rise to actionable levels, I’m not seeing the harm to me personally. Essentially, Beale escapes punishment here because he’s failed to be important enough to be harmful.
(emphasis added)
While there are certainly pragmatic reasons for not pursuing legal action, see, the Streisand effect, it’s important to note that John is wrong about the legal viability of such a claim.
First, John is correct that he would probably be considered a public figure. However, that does not mean that he needs to show that the defamation was done “for malicious purposes”. It merely means that the statement was made with knowledge of its falsity (or reckless disregard).
Second, he likely would not need to show actual economic or emotional harm. Depending on the jurisdiction, the damage to his reputation might constitute sufficient non-economic damages to support the claim. Additionally, because the defamatory statement concerns a criminal offense, i.e., rape, it would constitute defamation per se, obviating the need to demonstrate actual damages. As defamation is an intentional tort, it would also open up the possibility of a punitive damage claim.
This is not to suggest that John should run out and file a lawsuit–merely that he could legitimately do so. Even the unimportant defamer can still be punished.