Libel, an ancient tort, protects one's reputation in a community. Historically, libel damages were presumed because of the tort's potential to cause permanent reputational harm. Today, the likelihood ...of such reputational harm is increased exponentially by the prevalence of the Internet, where billions of pages of information are accessible to more than two billion people. When libel occurs on the Internet, why should the law favor the interests of Internet service providers (ISPs) over the interests of the libeled? In applying § 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) to defamation claims against ISPs arising from defamatory statements on ISP sites, the overwhelming majority of courts follow the lead of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and decline to hold ISPs accountable for the tort of libel, along with other civil and criminal claims. This overly broad interpretation of § 230 essentially renders a well-established cause of action a nullity. Why should a statute designed to protect ISPs from liability for blocking or restricting access to pornography or other objectionable materials be construed to bar defamation claims, even when the ISPs have not engaged in conduct to limit access to offensive materials? This Article argues that courts should adopt a narrower interpretation of § 230 to allow a remedy for defamation. Alternatively, it argues that Congress should adopt the DMCA as a model in revising § 230 by incorporating notice and take-down provisions. Such notice and take-down provisions would permit state common law defamation claims against ISPs, assuming the ISPs had actual or constructive knowledge of the defamatory content and failed to remove it within a statutorily mandated time period. Distributor or secondary publisher liability based on actual or constructive knowledge is consistent with traditional defamation law.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NMLJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, PRFLJ, SAZU, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
This study analyses the formation and dissemination of rumours (personal insults, slander, and ad hominem attacks) in the literary and religious polemics of 1620s France involving François Garasse, ...Théophile de Viau, and Guez de Balzac. Even though slander is constantly condemned as a threat to society, many writers use it, and accuse others of using it, as a powerful means to discredit an enemy. My principal focus is the medium chosen for the expression of gossip, for while polemical works featuring such gossip base their legitimacy on an oral source, written texts are used to formulate and spread the rumour. This initial analysis leads to a study of how authors restage rumours in their pamphlets while simultaneously disguising the ways in which, behind the scenes, they make use of common political or religious networks. I conclude by showing that the circulation of slander and gossip is based on long-established relationships between writers, on their similar social experiences, and shared acquaintances. The wide circulation of gossip facilitated by the overlapping of the social milieu and the world of print shows how important it is not to neglect this aspect of literary history.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, FZAB, GIS, IJS, KILJ, NLZOH, NMLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SBCE, SBMB, UL, UM, UPUK, ZRSKP
Three experienced advocates, Leonie Sheedy, Vlad Selacovic and Frank Golding, join in conversation with David Denborough to share their experiences in gaining access to childhood records for those ...who grew up in Australia's orphanages, children's Homes and foster care. The journey of discovery is often painful, even re-traumatising. Some Care Leavers find the official narrative does not match their version of their childhood. There are surprising omissions and inaccuracies and infuriating censorship that privileges other people's privacy over the right to the truth. The conversation shifts to strategies for dealing with these problems, but more importantly to the value of Care Leavers creating their own accounts of childhood and a more honest history.
