There are differences. Florida is quite unusual because it 'feels' like a combination of Spanish and English law. Defamation is hard to prove in Florida but harder in New York, that's why he chose Florida. Nationwide though a lot of Supreme Court decisions have made State Laws very similar.

Same. Unless he has proof it was made available (published, in legal speak) in the US/Florida it fails. I don't think the law would accept that being able to use a VPN then commit fraud (by lying on iPlayer and saying you're a UK citizen with a TV licence) is enough to be determined 'published'. 😂

Florida. He couldn't submit it in England because he's out of time. So he chose a 'friendly' state (New York would be his other option but laws are much stricter there and he'd never get anything). I think it could be thrown out for Jurisdiction too as it wasn't legally broadcast in Florida.

From what I know of US defamation law the action will fail on proving damage. Normally we think of damages after a verdict but for defamation it has to be proven that monetary/reputational damage occurred before the case even starts. The BBC's 'mistake' didn't stop Trump getting elected or harm him.

I remember that risk at raves in the 90s. 😂 Mind you, it's not always unwanted... 😏

Ooof. Damn. 🤤

You have mine... 😏