Notices tagged with libel
-
Wednesday, 09-Mar-11 19:47:55 UTC from web
-
Tuesday, 01-Mar-11 17:15:03 UTC from web
-
Case Law: O’Rawe v William Trimble Ltd, Northern Ireland – Olivia O’Kane « Inforrm's Blog
The defendant relied upon 23 sources and the court found these sources on the whole as credible and noted that “in general terms the newspaper had gone to great lengths to verify many aspects of its coverage” and the tone was noted as lacking sensationalism but not subdued. However, the failure to make pre-publication contact and include comment from the plaintiff led the judge to conclude the newspaper failed to conform to the standards of responsible journalism and thus it could not avail of the Reynolds defence. This conclusion was arrived at ‘in light of the seriousness of the allegations’ for the following reasons inter alia:
Friday, 28-Jan-11 06:46:43 UTC from web -
Libel and the public – we’re all publishers now | Media Standards Trust
RT @martinjemoore: Libel & the public - we're all publishers now: #libelreform questions by @jtownend on @newmatters http://ow.ly/3D42h
Thursday, 13-Jan-11 11:09:56 UTC from web -
BBC | BBC College of Journalism Blog - Signs that Twitter is entering the mainstream
The singer Courtney Love is due in a US court later this month to defend a libel case brought against her by the fashion designer Dawn Simorangkir. Ms Simorangkir claims that a stream of tweets by Ms Love destroyed her reputation and cost her millions of dollars. At the same time, Australian media academic Julie Posetti has been caught up in a defamation row over the way she live-tweeted comments made at a public conference about the editor-in-chief of The Australian.
Thursday, 13-Jan-11 10:23:41 UTC from web -
Steam buffs sell engine to pay libel bill - Telegraph
Lawyers for the 6024 Society argued in court that the journal, with a circulation of just 400 copies, was covered by legal privilege because it is only read by members of the society. This argument was accepted by the court. However, Mr Underhill's lawyers established that that issue of King's Messenger was also sent to 13 photographers – all non-members – whose work had appeared in its pages.
Sunday, 09-Jan-11 21:07:46 UTC from web -
Peter Black AM: Overhauling libel laws
RT @caebrwyn: RT @peterblackwales Overhauling #libel #law http://ff.im/-womJp
Friday, 07-Jan-11 09:54:23 UTC from web -
Fair comment is dead. Long live honest comment | Gill Phillips | Law | guardian.co.uk
It is not necessary, they said, that a comment must identify the matters on which it is based with sufficient particularity to enable the reader to judge for himself whether it was well founded. However, the court held "the comment has to identify, at least in general terms, the matters on which it is based" so that "the reader can understand what the comment is about and the commentator can, if challenged, explain by giving particulars of the subject matter of his comment why he expressed the views that he did". The court also made clear that a defendant was not permitted to rely in support of the defence of fair comment on matters that were not referred to, even in general terms, by the comment.
Thursday, 02-Dec-10 21:27:31 UTC from web -
Libel landmark: Fair comment now 'honest comment' - Press Gazette
Great. RT @eJournUK: landmark #libel ruling for the internet age: jStudents please note @pressgazette http://bit.ly/gMxzWy #law
Wednesday, 01-Dec-10 13:08:06 UTC from web -
Sense About Science | Bloggers and Libel Law
RT @gdnlocal: RT @freedebate: Bloggers guide to libel published today http://bit.ly/cY4TTl Please RT #libel
Friday, 19-Nov-10 11:35:54 UTC from web -
Online law survey: Mixed feelings about resources; 27% respondents encountered legal trouble in last two years | media law & ethics
Of the 19 online writers who were contacted over a legal matter in the last two years (27 per cent), only seven sought legal advice, which was paid for in four instances. The remaining 12 dealt with it alone. However, only two of the cases reached court. For six of the publishers, the case was dropped at an earlier stage. Two published corrections or clarifications. Nine involved payment and/or removal of material, although in two cases this was only partial removal of material. Of writers who cited legal trouble, 68% had been involved in defamation disputes; 37% copyright; 16% privacy; and 11% data protection.
Friday, 17-Sep-10 09:45:35 UTC from web -
Tuesday, 14-Sep-10 12:51:33 UTC from web
-
Tuesday, 14-Sep-10 12:38:09 UTC from web
-
Article 19 - Global Campaign for free expression
Established in 1987, ARTICLE 19 fights for all hostages of censorship, defends dissenting voices that have been muzzled, and campaigns against laws and practices that silence. We take our name from article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." ARTICLE 19 monitors, researches, publishes, lobbies, campaigns, sets standards and litigates on behalf of freedom of expression wherever it is threatened.
Wednesday, 11-Aug-10 07:21:09 UTC from web -
Law column: When 'defamation' becomes trivia
He said a publication should not be deemed 'defamatory' unless it "substantially affects in an adverse manner the attitude of other people toward the claimant, or has a tendency to do so".
Thursday, 01-Jul-10 07:14:29 UTC from web -
Lord Lester's defamation bill should be more radical | Law | guardian.co.uk
The bill has much to offer the media defendant. Among other things, the introduction of a single publication rule and the widening of the categories of information to which statutory privilege applies are not to be sniffed at. If the bill becomes law, reports of academic conferences will be protected and claimants will no longer be able rely on a case decided more than 150 years ago (dear old Duke of Brunswick) to bring proceedings when stories are downloaded from web archives years after first publication.
Thursday, 24-Jun-10 05:59:49 UTC from web -
Roy Greenslade: Judge raises the bar for libel claimants | Media | guardian.co.uk
The judge ruled that when people sue for libel it is not simply a matter of claiming that it imputes some detriment to them in the estimation of right-thinking members of society, they must be able to show a substantial effect.
Wednesday, 16-Jun-10 14:02:27 UTC from web -
Monday, 07-Jun-10 18:17:53 UTC from web
-
Wednesday, 02-Jun-10 07:50:07 UTC from web
-
Jack of Kent: Dave Osler Libel Decision Due Tomorrow
RT @jackofkent: Blogpost - My pro bono case: Dave Osler - Libel Decision Tomorrow http://tinyurl.com/37fw48b @tagthis law
Wednesday, 12-May-10 21:19:22 UTC from web
All freelish.us content and data are available under the