• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About
  • Services
  • Contact
  • Reviews

California Defamation Law Blog

  • Home
  • About
  • Blogs
  • Archive Page
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Services
  • Contact Us
  • (626) 793-8607
You are here: Home / Adrianos Facchetti Lawyer / TKO: The Only Way To Go

TKO: The Only Way To Go

September 3, 2011 by Adrianos Facchetti 1 Comment

During World War Two, when faced with the menace of the Axis, the greatest criminal conspiracy of all time, President Franklin D. Roosevelt did not hesitate to take a hard stand. ‘We will meet force with greater force, violence with greater violence,’ he declared. This is the only kind of language some people understand–and the only kind of action they fear (or even take seriously). — J. Paul Getty

Even though Getty was discussing his son’s kidnapping in specific, and the decline of Western civilization in general, his words apply with equal force to certain individuals who use the internet as a weapon to destroy the reputations of others.

Getty has it right: some people only respond to force. It’s the only language they understand–and the only action they fear.

Yet many clients have a hard time understanding this. They assume that talking or trying to reason with the defamer will produce results. But they are wrong. The only proper response in these circumstances is to use unremitting, overwhelming force. You must use all legal and ethical means to make this kind of person stop. This means you must file a lawsuit. Then when you get a Judgment, you must enforce it. And after all this if the defamer still doesn’t get the hint: you ask the Court to put them in jail. Period.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Buffer Share

Filed Under: Adrianos Facchetti Lawyer, judgment, Reputation Management Tagged With: "Adrianos Facchetti Lawyer" "Judgment"

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Janice Duffy says

    October 25, 2011 at 1:24 am

    Yes, and I agree with the force approach. after 18 months of trying to get seriously defamatory material removed from firstly Ripoff Report and then Google I filed proceedings in Australia against Google Inc and Google AU in February 2011.
    we don’t have the CDA and our High court (Dow Jones v Gutnick 2002)http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MULR/2003/21.html found that defamation occurs in the place in which it is downloaded.
    Am I scared-yes. But I have tough lawyers :). I have started a blog about the issues concerning these websites, Google and my case at
    drjaniceduffy.com It is not complete yet but I am getting it organised.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Janice Duffy Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Primary Sidebar

Some Featured

How to determine which costs are allowable in connection with an anti-SLAPP motion

Should a court consider a plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees in determining how much to award in fees for the defendant following a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

May a trial court consider a defendant’s “walk away” offer when determining the reasonableness of fees following a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

Recent Posts

Does a claim for intentional physical distress exist under California law?

Does California’s anti-SLAPP statute apply in bankruptcy court?

Must attorney-client confidences be revealed in order to obtain attorney’s fees after a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

Follow Us On

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

Search

Footer

California Defamation Law Blog

Law Offices of Adrianos Facchetti 4444 W. Riverside Drive, Suite 308, Burbank, CA 91505
California Defamation Lawyer & Attorney of Adrianos Facchetti Law Firm, offering services related to libel, internet defamation, slander, defamation of character, disparagement, anti-SLAPP, personal injury, car accidents, motorcycle accidents, trucking accidents, serving Los Angeles, San Fernando Valley, San Gabriel Valley, Pasadena, Burbank, Glendale, Arcadia, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Long Beach, Orange County, Ventura County, San Bernardino, and throughout California.

Recent Posts

  • How to determine which costs are allowable in connection with an anti-SLAPP motion July 18, 2022
  • Should a court consider a plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees in determining how much to award in fees for the defendant following a successful anti-SLAPP motion? June 28, 2022
  • May a trial court consider a defendant’s “walk away” offer when determining the reasonableness of fees following a successful anti-SLAPP motion? June 24, 2022
  • Does a claim for intentional physical distress exist under California law? June 20, 2022

Copyright © 2025 · Magazine Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in