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.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: defamation, liability, uk, web


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 13 Mar 2009 @ 5:16pm

    Way to go, Brits.

    "In my judgment the defendants, whenever they transmit and whenever there is transmitted from the storage of their news server a defamatory posting, publish that posting to any subscriber to their ISP who accesses the newsgroup containing that posting..."

    The thing that scares me is that people who have no understanding of technology are passing judgement based on their own half-assed analogies.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  2. identicon
    Ima Fish, 13 Mar 2009 @ 5:19pm

    "laws covering defamation have a much lower barrier in the UK"

    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.)

    link to this | view in thread ]

  3. icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 13 Mar 2009 @ 5:48pm

    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.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  4. identicon
    TDR, 13 Mar 2009 @ 5:58pm

    What kind of idiots are proposing these things? A modern technology class (or classes) should be an absolute prerequisite for holding public office these days.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  5. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 13 Mar 2009 @ 8:31pm

    So if I publish a defamatory piece in a newspaper, then it's 500,000 counts of defamation? Or whatever the circulation of the paper is? LOL.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  6. identicon
    Luci, 14 Mar 2009 @ 5:22am

    Re:

    No, that's not what they're saying. If you print it in a newspaper, it counts as one count of publishing. If you publish it online, they are counting each act of viewing it as a separate act of publishing, not understanding that the article is only published once.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  7. identicon
    Overcast, 14 Mar 2009 @ 8:09am

    They need a ministry of truth.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  8. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 15 Mar 2009 @ 9:05pm

    Re:

    To go with their Ministry of Peace

    link to this | view in thread ]

  9. identicon
    Vita Vi, 16 Mar 2009 @ 5:45am

    You can't have it both ways...

    Here's the problem.

    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.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  10. identicon
    evision, 23 Feb 2010 @ 7:56am

    link to this | view in thread ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.