Defamation
« Previous Entries Next Entries »House of Lords supports dumping criminal libel
Tuesday, October 27th, 2009And about time. We’ve already got rid of it. Mind you, the Aussie state of Victoria, where I am right now, still recognises criminal libel – which includes defamation of dead people and defamation where’s there’s no publication to anyone but the person defamed – and the defences (except truth) aren’t clear. Who knew? Looks […]
What’s wrong with trial by media?
Wednesday, October 21st, 2009I get irked by those who rail against “trial by media” as if it’s some general category of wrongdoing. Yes, some reporting of allegedly criminal conduct is unfair, inaccurate or unbalanced, and some may even prejudice an accused person’s right to a fair trial. In such cases, we should by all means criticise the reporting […]
Defamation stoush looming in London
Tuesday, July 7th, 2009Looks like a humdinger.
Defaming David?
Wednesday, June 10th, 2009I’m on RNZ’s Checkpoint and TV3 this evening talking about whether all those comments posted on social networking sites that say “Bain is guilty” (and colourful variations thereon) are defamatory. I’ve also been interviewed for an NZPA story. The answer: of course it’s defamatory to call someone a murderer. Yes, he could sue any number […]
An alternative to defamation?
Tuesday, June 9th, 2009If defamation laws are broken, can we fix them? I’ve been thinking about what we could do instead. It seems to me that the biggest problem is process (defamation cases are notoriously expensive, technical, slow, and stressful). I thought I’d toss an alternative process around for discussion. How about a different way of protecting people’s […]
Reading the tealeaves
Tuesday, June 9th, 2009I’ve just been watching argument in the Supreme Court in the Simunovich defamation case. For those interested in the fairly arcane (but nevertheless quite significant) issues at stake, my sense is that the media don’t have the upper hand. The Supreme Court judges do not seem attracted to the idea that the media should be […]
The case against defamation
Thursday, June 4th, 2009Nicky Hager explains how he thinks hardball Aussie political consultant Lynton Crosby (of Crosby Textor fame) used defamation laws try to bully him for criticisms he made during a radio interview. You’ll remember that Nicky’s book The Hollow Men contained some pretty ugly revelations about the advice Crosby Textor gave to the National Party at the […]
Media law tsunami in Canada
Tuesday, May 26th, 2009A wave of important media law cases is hitting the Canadian Supreme Court. One’s on qualified privilege and I’ve discussed it here. The others include cases on confidential sources and bail hearing publication bans. I’m inclined to think that the guidance on free speech issues from the Canadian SC tends to be the most thoughtful, […]
ECHR upholds ongoing defamation liability for internet
Thursday, March 12th, 2009One of the rules of defamation law is that each separate publication of something that’s defamatory gives rise to separate liability. So each time someone downloads a defamatory article, there’s a fresh publication and a new potential lawsuit. You can see how this might give rise to some headaches for news archives. However, an attempt […]
“Vile racist abuse?”
Wednesday, February 4th, 2009Here’s Vince Siemer’s case in a microcosm. Siemer writes intemperately about Stiassny. The courts overreact to Siemer. Siemer overreacts to the courts. In the $920,000 damages judgment, Justice Cooper accuses Siemer of directing “vile racist abuse” at Stiassny. Here’s his reasoning: [48] [Stiassny] complained also that some of the language used by Mr Siemer had […]
« Previous Entries Next Entries »