UK Judge Attracts Libel Tourists With $775k Award To New Zealand Cricket Player Over Defamatory Tweet

from the twibel-tourism dept

The UK has become famous for its overly aggressive libel laws and how they lead to libel tourism, with people from other countries running internet libel cases through the UK to take advantage of the favorable laws. Add to that the rise of Twitter, and questions about Twitter libel, and you've got an interesting legal situation to deal with. THREsq reports that perhaps the UK is now about to become the hotspot for "twiibel tourism" after it awarded $775k to a New Zealand cricket player, Chris Cairns, after the ex-chair of the Indian Premier League, Lalit Modi, had tweeted "Chris Cairns removed from the IPL auction list due to his past record in match fixing. This was done by the Governing Council today." The news report doesn't say if this is true or not, but the full ruling suggests there isn't enough evidence to support the claim.

Even if we accept that the accusation of match fixing is, indeed, false, there are still questions about jurisdiction and the size of the award -- made even more pressing considering how few people actually saw the tweet. From the court ruling:

The original Tweet was received by only a limited number of followers within England and Wales. One expert calculated that they numbered 95, the other 35. The parties have sensibly agreed that I should take the figure of 65. The second publication, to Cricinfo was on their website only for period of hours. The expert's figures for numbers of readers of this publication are respectively 450 and 1500. I shall proceed on the basis that about 1000 people read the second publication, which I have found carried the less grave but nonetheless serious meaning that there were strong grounds for suspecting that the claimant had been involved in match fixing. In respect of the second publication I also bear in mind that Cricinfo have settled with the Claimant, paying him £7,000 damages and a further sum for costs.

And yet the court still decides that the harm is so great that Modi should be hit with massive damages. All this is going to do is ensure a flood of such cases in the UK.

Filed Under: chris cairns, cricket, defamation, india, lalit modi, libel tourism, new zealand, tweets, uk

Indian Cricket Team Owner Plans Cheaper Line Of Jerseys To Compete With Knockoffs

from the market-research dept

We wrote about Indian film star Sharukh Khan not too long ago, when he was involved in a prank/hoax/joke about airport film scanners. However, Amar Balikai alerts us to something else he's potentially planning that seems pretty smart. Khan, via his production company, owns a cricket team, and there's huge demand for the jerseys. The official jerseys are apparently quite pricey, leading many to buy cheap knockoffs instead. But rather than freak out about the fakes, Khan apparently wants to create a second line of cheaper jerseys that the team can offer directly, to compete with the knockoff versions. We've seen this before, such as with the South African t-shirt company that secretly designed both an official line and its own, cheaper, knockoffs, and was able to better segment the market. In other words, these are both cases of companies recognizing that "piracy" is just a form of free market research. You just need to figure out how to capitalize on what it tells you.

Filed Under: cricket, jerseys

Reuters, AP Refuse To Cover Cricket Matches Over Restrictive Press Accreditation Rules

from the but-football?-baseball? dept

Sports leagues around the world have been trying to put more and more restrictive rules on various journalists and news organizations when it comes to reporting on their events. In the US, both the NFL and the MLB have put ridiculous restrictions on what reporters can write about or post on their websites. While, technically, these leagues cannot stop news organizations from covering their events, they can restrict what kind of access they have. Of course, for basic coverage, when the events are televised, reporters could just as easily cover the event while watching it on TV. Still, it's been disappointing that the major news organizations have refused to stand up to the football and baseball leagues over this attempt to restrict their reporting.

Apparently, they only do that on sports that don't get as much attention (in the US, at least).

Last year, we wrote how the press was planning to boycott various cricket matches over similar attempts to limit reporting. And, once again, major news organizations like Reuters are proudly announcing that they will not be covering certain cricket matches due to the press policies. The Associated Press has announced similar plans, and says that the AFP is also refusing to cover the matches. At what point do these sports leagues realize that they're better off with press coverage than without?

Filed Under: australia, cricket, reporting, restrictions, sports

Press Boycotts Indian Cricket Matches Over Restrictions On Digital Media

from the good-for-them dept

Last week, we wrote about how disappointing it was that American newspapers agreed to restrictions placed on them by Major League Baseball concerning how those newspapers could report on games online. You would think that newspapers reared on the idea of freedom of the press and editorial independence would not allow an organization they were covering to dictate the terms of coverage -- but they did. Luckily, it looks like reporters down in India are more willing to stand up for what they feel is right. Reader Bipin writes in to let us know of a very similar situation, where the Indian Premiere League put a number of restrictions on how the press could report online on its cricket competitions in India. Rather than agree to the restrictions, the press threatened to boycott IPL events entirely. Apparently the boycott threat has worked to get the league to back down a bit, though it may still end up with some restrictions. That still seems ridiculous, and hopefully the press will again point out that it needs to remain independent and cannot abide by any restrictions placed on it by the very organization it's covering.

Filed Under: bans, cricket, india, journalism, media restrictions, reporters