The victory by Tesla Incs outspoken chief executive over a Twitter message describing a British cave explorer as pedo guy has raised the bar for what amounts to libel online, according to some legal experts.
Musk defended his comments as trivial taunts made on a social media platform that he argued everyone views as a world of unfiltered opinion, which is protected as free speech, rather than statements of fact.
But they also agreed it would shift the legal landscape, undercutting the cases that would have seemed viable before the trial while defendants would use it to try to reduce possible settlement values.
Mark Sableman, a lawyer who defends defamation cases, said the freewheeling nature of social media has inevitably changed the understanding of language and what amounts to defamatory factual statements, versus opinion.
In general, to prove libel, the written form of defamation, someone must show the existence of a false statement, which defendants often try to present as opinion.
Several attorneys said Unsworth appeared to have a strong case, and noted that Musk failed to convince the judge to dismiss it at an early stage. But they cautioned that anything can happen in a courtroom where factors such as the credibility of witnesses and likeability of parties can become important factors.
Based on the courts pre-trial rulings on motions, Mr. Unsworths case going in had the potential to underpin a substantial verdict in his favor, said John Walsh, who represents people bringing defamation cases.
Unsworths attorney, Lin Wood, warned social media is tearing at the fabric of society and the Musk verdict would worsen that trend.