Archive for the ‘cyberlaw’ Category
April 17, 2013
Mark Donald (Student At Law -Thornton Grout Finnigan LLP) has published “This means war? Baglow v. Smith and online defamation in the blogosphere”.
The article comments on the fascinating Baglow v. Smith case and its implications for defamation law in relation to political blogs and online media. It appears to be the only legal paper in existence that references Bob Marley, Thomas Hobbes, Kim Jong-un and the movie “The Untouchables”.
The link to the paper is here.
A link to an introductory summary piece intended for non-lawyers can be found here.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Posted in Baglow v. Smith, blawging, Blawgosphere, blawgs, blog, cyberlaw, cyberlibel, defamation, Defamation Law, online, Online Defamation, social media | 1 Comment »
January 10, 2013
Matthew M. Pagett (North Carolina Court of Appeals) has posted “Sticks, Stones, and Cyberspace: On Cyberbullying and the Limits of Student Speech”, UNC School of Government School Law Bulletin 2012/2, December 2012. Here’s the abstract:
This article discusses cyberbullying in public schools and evaluates the pertinent statutory and common law standards. In particular, the article focuses on the relevant North Carolina statutory law and the extent to which school officials may punish students for cyberbullying behavior. The author also reviews the relevant Supreme Court standards as they apply to this particular factual scenario.
A pdf copy of the article is available for download on SSRN here.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Posted in cyber-bullying, cyber-harassment, cyberlaw, First Amendment, free speech, Freedom of expression, freedom of speech, internet, internet law | Leave a Comment »
November 20, 2012
The recent media scandal involving British peer, Lord McAlpine (pictured above) who threatened to sue the BBC, ITV and thousands of Twitter users over false accusations of pedophilia is discussed over at Inforrm’s Blog: (more…)
Like this:
Like Loading...
Tags:BBC, England, ITV, Lord McAlpine, Newsnight, Supreme Court of Canada, Twitter
Posted in acquiescence, Crookes v. Newton, cyberlaw, cyberlibel, defamation, Defamation Act 2011, Defamation Law, England and Wales, England and Wales High Court, English law, equity, estoppel, estoppel by representation of fact, free speech, libel, Libel Chill, waiver | 6 Comments »
September 28, 2012
Lili Levi (University of Miami – School of Law) has published “The Problem of Trans-National Libel”, American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. LX, No. 2, Spring 2012/ University of Miami Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2012-25. Here’s the abstract:
Forum shopping in trans-national libel cases “libel tourism” has a chilling effect on journalism) academic scholarship) and scientific criticism. The United States and Britain (the most popular venue for such cases) have recently attempted to address the issue legislatively. In 2070) the United States passed the SPEECH Act) which prohibits recognition and enforcement of libel judgments from jurisdictions applying law less speech-protective than the First Amendment. In Britain) consultation has closed and the Parliamentary Joint Committee has issued its report on a broad-ranging libel reform bill proposed by the Government in March 2011. This Article questions the extent to which the SPEECH Act and the Draft Defamation Bill will accomplish their stated aims. The SPEECH Act provides little protection for hard-hitting investigative and accountability journalism by professional news organizations with global assets. The proposed British bill has important substantive limits. Moreover) even if Parliament approves reform legislation discouraging libel tourism) such actions may shift to other claimant-friendly jurisdictions. Global harmonization of libel law is neither realistic nor desirable. Instead this Article proposes a two-fold approach. On the legal front, it supports the liberalizations of Britain’s proposed libel reform legislation and calls for foreign courts) when assessing the significance of contacts to the forum in cases affecting the United States) to consider seriously the importance of extensive First Amendment protections for political speech to the American concept of democracy. In addition) the Article calls for voluntary initiatives such as: 1) new approaches to help defend trans-national defamation claims when they are brought; and 2) measures to reduce the number of trans-national libel cases by improving the way in which the press does its job. The defense measures explored include the development of community-funded (rather than media-supported) libel defense funds; the formation of pro bono libel review consortia; and alternative approaches to increasing the availability of libel insurance. The recommended press-improvement measures include expanded access to documents, as well as the enhancement of accountability measures such as best-practices education, journalistic self-criticism, and updated codes of conduct.
A copy of the article is available for download via SSRN here.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Tags:Britain, Defamation, Government, Law, Libel tourism, Philippine, United Nations Human Rights Committee, United States
Posted in cyberlaw, cyberlibel, cyberspace, defamation, Defamation Act 2011, Defamation Law, First Amendment, free speech, Freedom of expression, freedom of speech, internet, internet defamation, internet jurisdiction, internet law, Internet Service Providers, libel, Libel Tourism, libel tourist, SPEECH Act, Transnational, Transnational Law, transnational litigation, United Kingdom, United States | Leave a Comment »
September 19, 2012
Melissa De Zwart (Adelaide Law School, The University of Adelaide) has published “Don’t Shoot the Messenger: Wikileaks and the Future of the Internet”, (2012), Telecommunications Journal Of Australia, Swinburne University of Technology 62 (4) p. 60. [registration required]. The abstract reads:
This article identifies some of the motivations behind, and the activities of, WikiLeaks. It then analyses the broader implications of the actions taken to withdraw funding support from WikiLeaks through the so-called ‘Banking Blockade.’ This article then considers the impact of the Banking Blockade which effectively dried up donations to WikiLeaks in 2010. It assesses what this means for the future of the Internet itself as an increasingly privatised domain, where the power of contract can overcome protections offered by the general law.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Tags:Australia, Denial-of-service attack, Julian Assange, MasterCard, United States, University of Adelaide, Visa, WikiLeaks
Posted in cybercrime, cyberlaw, internet, internet law, Internet Service Providers, Julian Assange, WikiLeaks | 1 Comment »
Antonin I. Pribetic
