Quote Originally Posted by Jaws View Post
Let's just say that Ms Bauer's understanding of the relevant factual and legal issues leaves something to be desired. No, everything to be desired.

Even if the material stated in the list was untrue—and it's not—there is a virtually absolute privilege to use a trademark as a proper exemplar. In this instance, the only mark at issue might be Bauer's agency name (and it's not a protectable trademark for this purpose, but that's a technical matter); and however disparaging that reference is, without demonstrated falsehood in the stream of commerce there can be no infringement.

Miss Snark is not anonymous. Miss Snark is pseudonymous. Miss Snark is a real person, as is Killer Yapp. In fact, Killer Yapp probably has a better track record with manuscripts than does Ms Bauer. (Note: That's called "hyperbole." It's not actionable.)

Something that is "libelous" is "defamatory." By definition.

Something can only be defamatory if it is untrue. Ms Bauer's posting makes not claim of falsehood. Given the way she throws other language around, I find that curious, to say the least.
I just feel sorry for the poor sod.