Final answer:
It is false that winning a trade libel suit is easy for a plaintiff; proving false statements that caused economic harm and actual malice is required, which can be difficult.
Step-by-step explanation:
While winning a personal libel suit can indeed be difficult, the statement that it is quite easy for a plaintiff to win a trade libel (product disparagement) suit is false. Like personal libel, winning a trade libel suit can also be challenging. Trade libel suits require the plaintiff to prove that the statements made were not only false but also caused direct economic harm to the business. Importantly, the protection afforded by the First Amendment and the legal precedence set by cases like New York Times v. Sullivan provide that even false statements are protected unless made with actual malice—knowledge of their falseness or with reckless disregard of whether they were false or not. This principle also applies to trade libel cases, particularly when the disparaged product or service is related to a public figure or a matter of public concern. Therefore, these safeguards can make it difficult for plaintiffs to win such cases unless they can meet the higher threshold of proving malice or negligence.