RSS
UK Says Every Website Visit Is Another Potential Defamation
from the yikes dept
In the past, we've noted that laws covering defamation have a much lower barrier in the UK, leading to what appear to be many more questionable defamation lawsuits there. It's now getting even more ridiculous. A court in the UK, basing its ruling on a precedent from 1830, says that every visit to a web page counts as a separate publication instance in a defamation lawsuit. Thus, every view of the content increases the potential liability. As many are noting, this creates a massive chilling effect to publishing anything online in the UK.
I've said this before, but it bears repeating: I'm beginning to question whether defamation laws even make sense online these days. The original purpose behind libel laws was to prevent the situation where the few folks who controlled the presses could lie and smear the reputation of someone who had no legitimate way to fight back. Given that everyone has a printing press and worldwide distribution system in their computers these days, everyone does have a way to respond to such false claims. I'm not saying that we should get rid of defamation laws or that there aren't some obviously questionable cases -- but it does seem like many defamation lawsuits these days are little more than "I don't like what that guy said about me!" As more and more people recognize that online content really does tend to be more conversational and opinionated than, say, something in a traditional newspaper, the worries about reputation being damaged come to seem a bit overblown.
10 Comments | Leave a Comment..
- More Details Emerge On Questionable UK Seizure Of Music Blog
- UK Now Seizing Music Blogs (With American Domains) Over Copyright Claims
- Sky News Tells Reporters Not To Use Twitter To Break News Without Permission
- The Web Is Saved: East Texas Jury Says Eolas Patents Are Invalid
- Tim Berners-Lee In Court To Try To Prevent Patent Troll Eolas From Patenting Key Web Concepts
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Way to go, Brits.
The thing that scares me is that people who have no understanding of technology are passing judgement based on their own half-assed analogies.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Yes! Finally. The laws in the UK regarding defamation are not "much stricter" as this site normally puts it, they have a lower barrier, as they are easier to prosecute and win. Thank you, thank you, thank you for finally getting it right!
(The fact that I'm excited about this says volumes about how utterly pathetic my life is.)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
(The fact that I'm excited about this says volumes about how utterly pathetic my life is.)
For a fish, you're doing really well.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
You can't have it both ways...
Either bloggers and web content deserves the same freedom of the press rights as traditional journalists - including being able to protect sources, etc. In which case, it DOES make a case for defemation.
OR
They don't, in which case, it's harder to get a defemation suit, but also harder to protect their content and rights.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment