[IP] more on Australia makes landmark net ruling

[Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: Steven Cherry <s.cherry@ieee.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:18:22 -0500
To: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>
Subject: Re: <[IP]> Australia makes landmark net ruling

Dave, certainly an important case. The article says, "... the high
court said that lawsuits would only be brought in places where the
person bringing the case had a reputation to defend.  'In all except
the most unusual of cases, identifying the person about whom material
is to be published will readily identify the defamation law to which
that person resorts'."

That might be true in Australia, but it needn't be true everywhere.
For example, is it true of Zimbabwe? Earlier this year, a reporter
for a British newspaper, The Guardian, was arrested there for
"publishing falsehoods," even though the newspaper is available there
solely on a UK Web site.

In an article in Spectrum magazine a couple of months ago, Dave
Bannisar of Privacy International wrote: "The crime, publishing
statements that turn out to be false, however credible they are at
the time of publication, is different from libel and is nonexistent
in many countries, including the UK. ... cases involving libel and
defamation are especially problematic. In many places, Zimbabwe
included, truth is not a defense. Even those who report about the
activities of government officials or government bodies can be
charged with libel, which may be considered a criminal offense."

<http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/resource/oct02/webs.html>

  Steven

------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
To unsubscribe or update your address, click
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/