Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Re-Imagining Resolution Of Online Defamation Disputes, Emily B. Laidlaw
Re-Imagining Resolution Of Online Defamation Disputes, Emily B. Laidlaw
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
If an individual or company is defamed online, they have two options to resolve the dispute, absent a technical solution. They can complain to an intermediary or launch a civil action. Both are deficient for a variety of reasons. Civil litigation is often unsuitable given the nature of online communications (across different platforms, jurisdictions, involving multiple parties, and spread with ease), the length and cost of litigation, and the ineffectiveness of traditional remedies. Intermediary dispute resolution processes can sometimes be effective, but lack industry standards and due process, place intermediaries in pseudo-judicial roles, and depend on the changeable commitments of …
Restoring Accountability In Freedom Of Expression Theory: Public Libel Law And Radical Whig Ideology, Randall Stephenson
Restoring Accountability In Freedom Of Expression Theory: Public Libel Law And Radical Whig Ideology, Randall Stephenson
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
As leading common law jurisdictions grapple with the Internet’s impact on defamation law, comparative legal scholarship has revealed long-standing problems with its underlying theoretical justifications. Specifically, public libel doctrine is commonly supported by appeals to democratic theory in the abstract. Accountability concerns most relevant to adjudicating public libel cases are thus routinely overlooked. This article aims to diagnose the causes of these theoretical inaccuracies, describe their impact on public libel law, and translate their significance for law reform. Through exploring eighteenth-century libertarian thought, we highlight the foundational importance of accountability and the checking function rationale to democratic theory and governance. …
Defamation, Privacy And Aspects Of Reputation, Andrew T. Kenyon
Defamation, Privacy And Aspects Of Reputation, Andrew T. Kenyon
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
Unlike the commonplace statement that defamation law protects reputation, this article suggests that it only protects aspects of reputation. Previously, defamation was often the only avenue of legal protection for reputation worth examining, but now privacy actions also offer an avenue of protection for aspects of reputation in many jurisdictions. In other words, informational privacy law now protects aspects of reputation, as does defamation law. Recognizing this fact leads to the suggestion that exactly what each action—defamation and informational privacy—seeks to protect could be stated more concisely. This exercise, undertaken in this article, draws on classic defamation law analysis by …
“O! They Have Lived Long On The Alms-Basket Of Words”: Enhancing Efficacy And Reducing Cost By Limiting The Role Of Law And Lawyers In Defamation Disputes, Andrew Scott
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
To triangulate the individual and social interests in reputation and free speech, the common law has generated an unwieldy corpus of technical rules and counterfactual assumptions. This complexity entails enormous cost and opportunities for game-playing by astute, well-resourced litigants. Neither reputation nor free speech is well-served by reform initiatives that focus mainly on amending the substantive law. This paper offers a critical assessment of a proposal that might better address complexity and cost. This comprises the inextricable combination of two initiatives: repeal of the ‘single meaning rule’ which promises to simplify the court’s task, but instead generates complexity in defiance …
Internet Intermediary Liability In Defamation, Emily B. Laidlaw, Hilary Young
Internet Intermediary Liability In Defamation, Emily B. Laidlaw, Hilary Young
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
Given the broad meaning of publication in defamation law, internet intermediaries such as internet service providers, search engines, and social media companies may be liable for defamatory content posted by third parties. This article argues that current law is not suitable to dealing with issues of internet defamation and intermediary responsibility because it is needlessly complex, confusing, and may impose liability without blameworthiness. Instead, the article proposes that publication be redefined to require a deliberate act of communicating specific words. This would better reflect blameworthiness and few intermediaries would be liable in defamation under this test. That said, intermediaries profit …