[rumples riot]

As a former solicitor who practiced in corporate law and in particular defamation and intellectual property rights, Omaroo has got the statement pretty correct.

For defamation to succeed the statement must be false and it must act to discredit a persons (companies are person too) earning capacity. There are other criteria but that is the basis of it. Several exceptions exist that can still mean that a matter can succeed when on the facts it looks as though it will not.

All other commentary here from certain parties about what constitutes defamation are erroneous. Defamation law here is not like in the US. The rules are slightly different and the judgements of late are not binding, they are simply persausive. There are multiple jurisdictions here and all have slightly different rules on defamation. Primarily it is covered by the Tort of defamation, but slight variations exist. There are not many upper court decisions on the issue of defamation and the web as yet. It really needs to be tested before anyone can say one way or the other, especially given that most of the servers are in another Jurisdiction. Where are you in cyberland when you make the statements? Are you on the server or are you on Australian soil?

Bottom line don't defame.