Online defamation cases more than double thanks to social media
Social media has led to a surge in the number of online defamation cases being brought, according to research carried out by legal information provider Sweet & Maxwell.
The number of UK cases citing online defamation rose from seven to 16 in 2010, while the overall number of defamation proceedings rose by 4 per cent from 83 to 86.
Jeremy Clarke-Williams, head of media, libel and privacy at Russell Jones & Walker, said: “The news that there’s been an increase in defamation court cases involving online publications is not surprising. What is perhaps surprising is how modest the numbers remain - up from seven to only 16 in the last year.
“The colossal increase in the use of social networking sites, blogs and the encouragement to members of the public to interact with postings and articles on websites means the scope to defame has correspondingly expanded.”
Addleshaw Goddard managing associate Korieh Duodu, who specializes in libel law, added that people defamed online “often find it time-consuming and difficult to have the offending material removed, because many platform providers don’t accept responsibility for their users’ content”.
He added: “There’s certainly a need for greater accountability of the providers of user-generated content; a need to tighten the regulatory framework within which they operate. This ought to have been a focus of the proposed Defamation Bill currently being debated.”
Meanwhile, the number of businesses using defamation law to protect their reputation against complaints from customers or individuals more than trebled while defamation cases involving celebrities fell by 59 per cent from 22 in 2009-10 to nine in 2010-11.
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Readers' comments (12)
Anonymous | 3-Sep-2011 10:57 am
"silly little defence"
Its seems that the post makes a strong moralistic arguement- libel law is not just designed for the rich- as it is so often stigmatised to be- and the examples given do demonstrate why people need protection. Rather than calling it "silly" why not articulate an actual response to the points?!
If message boards annoy you- don't read them!!!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 5-Sep-2011 12:42 pm
Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a properly functioning society. People should have the right to put their ideas forward and others should be free to challenge those opinions. A board like this is an excellent example of people having the chance to be forthright and challenge the views of others.
Where difficulties arise are where comments are put forward either to deliberately mislead or where a challenge doesn't carry the same authority / reach the same audience.
I see the 16 cases as a good example of common sense on the part of the general public. There are very few situations where recourse to the courts is appropriate. The Norway example above appears to be one of those rare cases.
The posts above intrigue me. Reading them I was struck by how articulate people were on the subject and how they clearly believe these cases are important. The problem is that I can't reconcile these strongly held beliefs with the statistics, in partiular complete lack of pro bono work.
It's tempting to label these people as hypocrites who self-righteously trot out convincing arguments but don't care enough to commit their time to resolving the issue.
However, I don't think this is the case. I think that these people believe in the principle of being able to defend your reputation but they also appreciate that in 99.9% of cases court action would be an utterly disproportionate recourse.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment