每日法律英语词条（13）：Defamation

Defamation is the tort of publishing to persons, other than the person defamed, imputations the effect of which is to lower the reputation of the person defamed in the eyes of the public at large.

诽谤是向遭诽谤的人以外的人士发布贬损该人言辞的侵权行为，其影响是在整体公众人士的眼中降低遭诽谤的人的名誉。

At common law defamatory imputations may exist in spoken form (slander) or in some permanent form (libel). In assessing whether defamation has occurred, the intention of the defendant is irrelevant; it is the effect of the defendant’s actions which matters. 

在普通法上，诽谤性的贬损言辞可以口头的（短暂形式诽谤）或若干永久的（永久形式诽谤）形式存在。在评估是否存有诽谤时，被告人的意图无关，重要的是被告人的行为的影响。

In this decision the Supreme Court for the first time held that state libel laws must meet certain free speech protections under the First Amendment. The Sullivan case required what English common law and state law did not, that the person defamed must prove his defamer was at fault. 

在纽约时报诉莎莉文一案中，美国最高院第一次判决认为州诽谤法必须要符合宪法第一修正案所规定的言论自由保护。莎莉文案中，法院要求被诽谤者必须证明诽谤者要有过错，这一要求之前并未规定在英国普通法和州法中。

In Sullivan, concerned only with libel lawsuits filed by public officials when the defamatory statement related to their public duties, the Court determined that the public official claiming to have been defamed must prove that the person who defamed him knew the statement was false or recklessly disregarded whether it was true or not.

沙利文案，只涉及政府官员提起的诽谤诉讼，并且案涉诽谤言论与他们的公共职责相关。法院认为，声称受到诽谤的政府官员必须证明诽谤人自己明知自身言论是错误的或者不顾事实真相（的情况下实施诽谤行为）。

Later decisions amplifying the rule in Sullivan established that fault must be proven in all libel cases, at least against the mass media.

后来的判决扩大了沙利文案中所确立的规则，规定所有的诽谤案都必须证明过错，至少对媒体而言是如此。

【锦曦注：沙利文案中所确立的规则又称为时报—沙利文原则，也就是联邦法律禁止官员因他的职务行为遭诽谤而获得赔偿,除非他能证明该诽谤是出于“实际恶意”,并且证据必须是明白无误或令人信服的】

P.S如果想了解英美法系下的“诽谤”，一定不能绕过一篇经典的判例：New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 84 S.Ct. 710, 11 L.Ed.2d 686 (1964)【纽约时报诉莎利文案】。

欢迎关注锦曦书斋，后台回复“诽谤”，领取美国法院判决原文以及方流芳教授的翻译文本。

点个在看，一起打卡吧