Comments on: A bit more on libel and t'interweb

By: Quick, probably not very well-thought out post about law and teh interweb « Gary Andrews

Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:17:47 +0000

[...] Libel and the internet may not be perfect, but in this regard the law is streets ahead of Contempt of Court and the internet. The Baby P case has demonstrated that it’s virtually impossible to enforce Contempt laws in an online world (although I wouldn’t go as far as saying its impossible to get a fair trial). [...]

By: Sorry Marcel, I think you’re wrong « Gary Andrews

Sorry Marcel, I think you’re wrong « Gary Andrews — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 21:57:24 +0000

[...] take Marcel’s point about libel. As Nosemonkey said in a comment on this blog, it would probably be a good thing if a blogger was done for libel as this would help clarify a [...]

By: chris white

chris white — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:40:31 +0000

(That last comment was flagrantly defamatory, incidentally, and I don’t really mean it.)

By: chris white

chris white — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:07:57 +0000

Justice Eady: plagiarising cunt.

By: Gary Andrews

Gary Andrews — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:07:25 +0000

You know what, I don’t actually disagree with you. In the long term it would be useful to get some properly established case law down, so we have a better idea where we stand.

I’ve read plenty before now on reasonably well-read blogs that are pretty libellous and aren’t something I would have published. I’m genuinely surprised that a blog case hasn’t made it all the way to the courts so far (or at least none I’m aware of).

By: Nosemonkey

Nosemonkey — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:53:20 +0000

Further to all this, and at the risk of sounding like a traitor to the blogging cause, I do feel it’s long overdue that a blogger actually WAS done for libelling someone so that we can sort out our precise legal standing in a proper test case.

Let’s face it, various blogs genuinely do libel people every day, and thanks to the ongoing lack of legal action (combined with the US-centric view of freedom of speech that’s spread around the non-American web), it’s become a bit of an assumption amongst bloggers that they are somehow immune to the libel laws and can say what they like about whom they like. We can’t and we shouldn’t.

The First Amendment applies to the US alone, like it or not. And hell, even the US has libel laws… They’re an important check on the abuse of the press, and – when working well – an important contribution to any functioning democracy, as they are primarily intended to prevent the spread of misinformation. Blogs, of course, thrive on misinformation – you can see why bloggers would get up in arms, especially those who don’t really know what a libel actually is…