|
added to our DB:
01.02.2007
A case in Kansas asks whether libel should ever be prosecuted
Find Law
Is criminal defamation a viable concept for the 21st century, or an ancient relic that should be scrapped? That is the question raised by the case of Kansas v. Carson -- and a question the U.S. Supreme Court will probably ultimately have to resolve.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
03.02.2007
A Law and Norms Critique Of The Constitutional Law Of Defamation (PDF)
by Michael Passaportis
This Note will argue the contrary: the federal right’s colonization of this particular sphere of the common law accomplished mischief. Reputation is not the outmoded, insipid, and purely personal asset that the Court’s jurisprudence suggests. Rather, it is a useful social mechanism that checks community members’ selfishness and encourages cooperative behavior. Citizens who desire social commendation find public-spirited behavior more attractive. Reputation increases such behavior by amplifying the social benefits accruing to the actor. In this manner, pursuing a good name contributes to social welfare. The Court failed to recognize this beneficial aspect of reputation when it weakened the common law of defamation. As a consequence, the balance of competing interests underlying the constitutional replacement yielded too much to free speech and retained too little for reputation.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
19.10.2005
Basic Elements of Defamation Law
by Greg Abbott - Attorney at Law
I. WHAT IS DEFAMATION?... Libel or Slander: Libel is written, slander is oral... Historically, defamation consisted of slander and libel. Slander is defamation by speaking, and libel is defamation by means of writing. After the invention of the printing press, the permanence of the written word meant that libel caused far more damage than slander. Slander, however, had a big impact in pre-literate communities where the spoken word was the primary way information was exchanged... In modern times, the legal distinction between libel and slander has been narrowed. Most modern defamation cases involve libel, and modern writers have come to use the term "defamation" to describe both libel and slander... Defamation consists of the following:..
click here
to view
added to our DB:
19.10.2005
Canadian Defamation Law
by Lloyd Duhaime
(Defamation is where) a shameful action is attributed to a man (he stole my purse), a shameful character (he is dishonest), a shameful course of action (he lives on the avails of prostitution), (or) a shameful condition (he has smallpox). Such words are considered defamatory because they tend to bring the man named into hatred, contempt or ridicule. The more modern definition (of defamation) is words tending to lower the plaintiff in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
01.02.2007
Criminal Defamation: An "Instrument of Destruction" (PDF)
by Prof. Jane E. Kirtley, J.D.,
In his concurring opinion in the criminal libel case, Garrison v. Louisiana, U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas lamented that the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution was in danger of being “constantly watered down” through the majority’s attempt to “balance” the absolute language of the First Amendment “and what judges think is needed for a well-ordered society.” Particularly pernicious, he suggested, was the toleration of criminal libel actions brought by government officials, which would inevitably result in anyone who “outraged the sentiments of the dominant party” being “deemed a libeler.”... Douglas reminded his colleagues that the contemporary common law doctrine of seditious libel was a creation of the infamous Court of Star Chamber. He concluded, “It is disquieting to know that one of its instruments of destruction is abroad in the land today.”...
Douglas was not exaggerating. Criminal libel is no less than an “instrument of destruction.” It is an instrument used to destroy discussion, debate and dissent. It has no place
in any society that calls itself a democracy.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
01.02.2007
Defamation in Australia
Caslon
In Australia defamation action is essentially concerned with damage to reputation, rather than publication being untrue or an invasion of a plaintiff's privacy. There has been disagreement about the appropriate balance between free speech and protection of reputations... Although most litigation involves civil liability for defamation, the criminal codes of several states include provision for prosecution of defamatory statements as criminal offences. Those provisions cover statements that had a malicious basis and, in particular, that were known by the publisher to be false. Penalties include punitive damages and imprisonment.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
19.10.2005
Defamation law and free speech
by Whistleblowers Australia
The law of defamation is supposed to protect people's reputations from unfair attack. In practice its main effect is to hinder free speech and protect powerful people from scrutiny. This leaflet provides information about legal rights and options for action for people who may be threatened by a legal action or who are worried about something they want to say or publish...
click here
to view
added to our DB:
19.10.2005
Defamation Law in Ireland
indigo.ie
The law of defamation in Ireland is governed by the Constitution, Common Law and the Defamation Act 1961. That Act repeals a number of previous pieces of legislation - including the Act of Slaunder, passed at the time of King Henry VIII! .. Part I of the Act is a preliminary section, while part II deals with criminal libel. Part III - sections 14 to 28 - deal with civil defamation proceedings.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
19.10.2005
Defamation Law: Positive Jurisprudence
by the President and Fellows of Harvard College
In September 1999, lawyers, journalists, human rights advocates, and U.N. representatives gathered in Sri Lanka to develop international standards for defamation law.[1] Identifying repressive laws and government abuse as serious threats to freedom of expression, ARTICLE 19, the International Centre Against Censorship, had organized the symposium as part of its program to promote “good defamation laws.”[2] Local journalists provided an unplanned reminder of the need for and power of freedom of expression when they staged an anti-government rally outside the conference hall. A Sri Lankan minister and invited speaker had to “run the gauntlet” of protestors before entering the building.[3] After three days of discussion, participants produced a declaration that called for the abolition of criminal defamation laws and set guidelines for procedure, defenses, and sanctions in civil cases. ARTICLE 19 plans to publish and distribute these standards over the next few years.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
03.02.2007
Defamation Law: Positive Jurisprudence
by Bonnie Docherty
In September 1999, lawyers, journalists, human rights advocates, and U.N. representatives gathered in Sri Lanka to develop international standards for defamation law. Identifying repressive laws and government abuse as serious threats to freedom of expression, ARTICLE 19, the International Centre Against Censorship, had organized the symposium as part of its program to promote “good defamation laws.” Local journalists provided an unplanned reminder of the need for and power of freedom of expression when they staged an anti-government rally outside the conference hall. A Sri Lankan minister and invited speaker had to “run the gauntlet” of protestors before entering the building. After three days of discussion, participants produced a declaration that called for the abolition of criminal defamation laws and set guidelines for procedure, defenses, and sanctions in civil cases. ARTICLE 19 plans to publish and distribute these standards over the next few years.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
19.10.2005
Defamation on the Internet
by David F. Sutherland
Defamation law is an area of significant complexity. Every aspect has nuances. Defamation law will be described here in very broad strokes. These are not intended to guide the reader in respect of any specific defamation case; that would be extremely dangerous. For any particular case, the reader is directed to Gatley on Libel and Slander and The Law of Defamation in Canada, as starting points. As will be discussed below, the worldwide nature of the Web has led to jurisdictional issues. Historically, there have been important differences between US defamation law, on the one hand, and English and Canadian law, on the other. Until recently, many of these differences have stemmed from decisions based on the first amendment to the US Constitution. The contrast became stark with the 1964 US Supreme Court decision in New York Times v. Sullivan. Recently, enactment of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 has made US cyber law even more permissive. That Act gives commercial interactive computer service providers immunity from liability for material posted by third parties.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
19.10.2005
Defamation: Libel and Slander Law
by Aaron Larson
It is not unusual for attorneys to receive inquiries about defamation actions from people who are in conflicts with neighbors or other members of their communities, and have become the subjects of vicious lies. The area of law most implicated by that type of conduct is "defamation of character", a cause of action which is generally defined to include "libel" and slander".
click here
to view
added to our DB:
03.02.2007
Law relating to Defamation Part 1
ourkarnataka.com
Section 499 of Indian Penal Code provides that "Whoever by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter excepted, do defame that person".
click here
to view
added to our DB:
03.02.2007
Law relating to Defamation Part 2
ourkarnataka.com
It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion respecting the merits of any performance which its author has submitted to the judgment of the public, or respecting the character of the author so far as his character appears in such performance, and no further. A performance may be submitted to the judgment of the public expressly or by acts on the part of the author, which imply such submission to the judgment of the public.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
03.02.2007
Libel
Brainy Encyclopedia
In English and American law, and systems based on them, libel and slander are two forms of defamation (or defamation of character), which is the tort or delict of publishing (meaning to a third party) a false statement that negatively affects someone's reputation. "Defamation" is the term generally used internationally, and is accordingly used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "libel" and "slander".
click here
to view
added to our DB:
01.02.2007
Memorandum by ARTICLE 19 (Global Campaign for Free Expression)
Select Committee on European Union
1.1 As part of its efforts to harmonise private international law in civil and commercial matters, the European Commission has developed a proposed regulation relating to the choice of law for non-contractual obligations (Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on the Law Applicable to Non-Contractual Obligations (the proposed Regulation)).[5] 1.2 The proposed Regulation has been amended based on an initial round of comments received. This Submission is based on an amended draft circulated in September 2002. 1.3 The proposed Regulation generally provides for cases to be heard according to the law of the jurisdiction in which the damage occurred, regardless of where the case is filed (the Article 3 rule). It does provide an exception to this, at Article 6(1), so that courts are not required to apply defamation laws which would breach their own jurisdiction's freedom of expression rules. Unfortunately, the defamation laws of many EU Member States, as well as those of the 10 accession States, do not comport with international freedom of expression standards. The exception, while welcome, does not protect a publisher against suit in a foreign country, where the plaintiff claims to have suffered harm in that same country. This can result in the application of harsh defamation laws, including laws which breach Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.[6] This is a particular problem for Internet publications, which are effectively universal in nature. 1.4 The comments below address this problem in detail. The comments also address, briefly, certain difficulties relating to Article 6(1) and the special problem of criminal defamation laws.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
03.02.2007
Online Defamation Law (Bloggers' FAQ)
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Generally, defamation is a false and unprivileged statement of fact that is harmful to someone's reputation, and published "with fault," meaning as a result of negligence or malice. State laws often define defamation in specific ways. Libel is a written defamation; slander is a spoken defamation.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
01.02.2007
Putting Expression Behind Bars: Criminal Defamation and Freedom of Expression (Background Paper for EU NGO Forum) (PDF)
article19.org
In this paper, we argue that criminal defamation laws inherently fail to strike an appropriate balance between reputations and freedom of expression. Criminal defamation laws are a major obstacle to freedom of expression in many parts of the world. The key problem with criminal defamation is that a breach may lead to a custodial sentence or another form of severe criminal sanction, such as a suspension of the right to practise journalism. The stigma of a criminal conviction can harm a journalist’s career long after the penalty has formally been discharged. The threat of such sanctions casts a wide shadow as journalists and other
steer well clear of the prohibited zone to avoid any risk of conviction. This can lead to serious problems of self-censorship, stifling legitimate criticism of government and public officials.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
03.02.2007
Slander and Libel
Wikipedia
"Defamation" is the general term used internationally, and is used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "slander" and "libel". Libel and slander both require publication. The fundamental distinction between libel and slander lies solely in the form in which the defamatory matter is published. If the offending material is published in some fleeting form, as by spoken words or sounds, sign language, gestures and the like, then this is slander. If it is published in more durable form, for example in written words, film, compact disc and the like, then it is considered libel.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
09.02.2007
The German Criminal Code
iuscomp.org
The German Criminal Code (Full Text) http://www.iuscomp.org/gla/
click here
to view
added to our DB:
03.02.2007
Towards decriminalisation of defamation (Motion for a recommendation)
presented by Mr Holovaty and others
The Assembly therefore invites; i.Council of Europe member states to consider decriminalising libel and slander, with the exception of extreme cases when other fundamental rights have been seriously violated, such as hate speech ; ii. the Committee of Ministers to consider taking further steps towards the decriminalisation of defamation in Council of Europe member states.
click here
to view
added to our DB:
03.02.2007
Zamfara State Of Nigeria Shari'ah Penal Code Law
zamfaraonline.com
Every person who professes the Islamic faith and/or every other person who voluntarily consents to the exercise of the jurisdiction of any of Shari'ah Courts established under the Shari'ah courts (Administration of Justice and certain consequential changes) Law, 1999, shall be liable to punishment under the Shari'ah Penal Code for every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof of which he shall be guilty within the State.
click here
to view
|
