Page 103 - Law and the Media

Law and the Media
4.2. Internet defamation

4.2.1 General principles

The legal principles of defamation apply to publication in new media formats. In particular,
widespread access to the Internet has multiplied the opportunity for publication of a
defamatory statement.

Those working in the media should apply the existing legal principles of defamation to any
material published in new media format in order to avoid being sued for defamation. In
addition, there are four main areas of Internet publication that may give rise to an action for
defamation:

1. The world wide web
2. Newsgroups
3. Email
4. Bulletin boards.

The world wide web
The world wide web (the ‘Web’) is the most important subdivision of the Internet. It is the
largest system linking together millions of web sites and documents across the Internet.

Publication on the Web satisfies the requirement of communication to a third party. Each
individual or organization is responsible for the documents they author and publish on the
Web, whether the documents are published on their own web site or that of someone else.

Online newspapers and magazines are ‘publishers’ under the Defamation Act 1996, and must
avoid defamatory statements in the same way as they would when publishing in traditional
formats. The principles of vicarious liability apply, so that an online newspaper or magazine
can be sued as well as an individual journalist or author.

Newsgroups
Newsgroups are Internet groups where subscribers post comments and discuss certain
subjects. As soon as a message is posted, it is published to a third party.

The first court ruling in England on the issue of Internet defamation involved a posting on
a newsgroup (Godfrey v Demon Internet Ltd (2000)). Godfrey brought a libel action against
Demon, an Internet service provider, alleging that postings about him on a newsgroup hosted
by Demon were defamatory. Prior to issuing proceedings, Godfrey asked Demon to remove
the postings. Demon accepted that the postings were defamatory but claimed it was not
responsible for material posted by its users.

The court accepted that Internet service providers such as Demon are excluded from the
definition of ‘publisher’ under the Defamation Act 1996. This allowed Demon to raise the
66