Apologies for being rather behind with the
news here as the result of the UK libel case involving Chris Cairns and Lalit
Modi was handed down on 26th March. I had followed the case, which was heard in
early March, but then forgot to look out for the judge to deliver his verdict,
due a few weeks later. Obviously too caught up with the Touraine Spring, wines etc..
The judge found in Cairns’ favour finding
that Modi’s tweet had been libelous and he awarded him £90,000 in damages.
I think it was predictable that the judge
found that comments on twitter and other social network sites could
constitute libel. Anyone who thought that social networks including blogs are a
free-for-all, unregulated arena was being foolish and naive. One surprise is that a number
of witnesses at the Levenson Inquiry into UK press standards have claimed that
the internet is unregulated. Although it is true there is no internet press
body and difficult to imagine how this might operate, bloggers, facers,
twitters etc. can indeed be pursued under the laws of libel.
Modi has said that he will appeal.
Links:
• Former New Zealand captain sued Lalit
Modi over allegation
• Modi 'singularly failed' to back up claim made on Twitter
• Modi 'singularly failed' to back up claim made on Twitter
Communication in social media such as
Twitter is often seen as canteen gossip or private discussions but from a legal
perspective they are nothing of the sort.
http://bit.ly/Hfcf4w
No comments:
Post a Comment