Search In BriefOver a thousand pages of free legal information written by our selected team of legal experts |
|||||
Browse Legal Topics |
Ask a Solicitor Online |
||||
|
|
|||||
Media Identification of Suspects
Media Identification of People Assisting Police
Reporting on Spent Convictions
Release of Prosecution Material
Legal Challenges Under Broadcasting Act
Advertising Standards Authority
Archiving of Internet Resources
Classification of Films Videos
Defamation and Internet Service Providers
Internet Defamatory Statements
Defamation of Election Candidates
The internet albeit enhancing the ways in which we communicate with each other, do business and act as consumers also brings with it certain problems. For example the amount of comments and publications added to the web on a daily basis is an extremely difficult thing to track. As a consequence of this the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have their work cut out when trying to police potentially defamatory statements.
A defamatory statement is one which is false and causes damage to a person’s reputation or otherwise does them harm.
There is a defence under Section 1 of the Defamation Act which is intended to protect intermediaries, who could otherwise be liable for publishing a defamatory statement on the internet.
In order for an individual to fall within this defence the following things will need to be shown:
Section 1(2) of the Defamation Act provides definitions of what is meant by author, editor or publisher. They are as follows:
According to the Defamation Act a person will not be considered to be an author, editor or publisher if he is only involved in the following:
The main purpose of the above defence is to ensure that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and other intermediaries are intended to benefit from the defence by falling into one of the above categories of exclusions.
The second two of the most relevant for Internet Service Providers (ISPs).
There is the possibility that an Internet Service Provider could be deemed to be a publisher in relation to a defamatory statement and thus liable for the publication of this statement.
The possibility of this occurring happens when an Internet Service Provider (ISP) has been made aware of the existence of a defamatory statement. An Internet Service Provider can thus be deemed to be a common law publisher when they have been made aware of a defamatory statement and have taken no action to remove the existence of the statement.
Accordingly once it was established that the Internet Service Provider was in fact a publisher then the ISP would not be able to successfully argue that it did not know, and had reason to believe, that what it did caused or contributed to the publication of the defamatory statement.
When an Internet Service Provider has been made aware of a defamatory statement, in order to rely on the Section 1 defence, they must remove the allegedly defamatory postings as soon as they have been made aware of their existence.
The removal process is called a notice and take down procedure.
The Internet Service Provider would not be entitled to first investigate the merits of the allegation not to assess the availability of other libel defences. This would only be able to be done if the Internet Service Provider suspends access to the posting while it does so.
Ask your legal question using the box below and have a response from solicitor or barrister within minutes.