Thread by @AkivaMCohen

Hey, new #LitigationDisasterTourists arriving for the Niemann v. Carlsen dust-up, this tweet is the first in a side-thread of links to older tweets discussing "actual malice" - an important standard in US defamation law that significantly harms Niemann's chances of success

Here's a one-tweet summary of what the "actual malice" standard requires a public-figure defamation plaintiff to prove:

https://twitter.com/AkivaMCohen/status/1400855139662114823

Here's a brief discussion of whether niche fame (i.e. someone super well known in a particular community but not the wider world) makes you a public figure (yes, if the defamation at issue is directed at that niche community)

https://twitter.com/AkivaMCohen/status/1147212587714658304

Also, how speaking out on a controversy of public concern can make someone who *isn't* a public figure a "limited purpose public figure"

https://twitter.com/AkivaMCohen/status/1146604181215686656

Which means that person would need to satisfy the actual malice standard for defamation claims based on the subject of that public discussion.

Last for this side thread: Yeah, this is an ENORMOUS burden on the public-figure plaintiff that is almost impossible to reach.

https://twitter.com/AkivaMCohen/status/1153811548583763969