Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
cyberlaw:intermediaries_defamation [2019/09/05 14:31]
nic
cyberlaw:intermediaries_defamation [2019/09/05 14:38] (current)
nic
Line 1: Line 1:
 # Intermediary Liability for Defamation # Intermediary Liability for Defamation
  
-##Chapter Overview+## Chapter Overview
  
 This Chapter explains how defamation is an example of one area of law where intermediaries in Australia are under strong legal duties, backed by the substantial threat of financial liability, to respond to complaints about material posted by users. It commences by outlining the elements of and defences to a defamation action. The Chapter then explains intermediary liability for '​publishing'​ defamatory imputations and concludes with summaries of important case law.  This Chapter explains how defamation is an example of one area of law where intermediaries in Australia are under strong legal duties, backed by the substantial threat of financial liability, to respond to complaints about material posted by users. It commences by outlining the elements of and defences to a defamation action. The Chapter then explains intermediary liability for '​publishing'​ defamatory imputations and concludes with summaries of important case law. 
 +
  
 ## The Law of Defamation ## The Law of Defamation
Line 45: Line 46:
 **Video Overview by Kylie Pappalardo: [Selected Defences to Defamation](https://​www.youtube.com/​watch?​v=YD76y1JCXnA)** **Video Overview by Kylie Pappalardo: [Selected Defences to Defamation](https://​www.youtube.com/​watch?​v=YD76y1JCXnA)**
  
-###Truth+### Truth
  
 A complete defence arises for any defamatory imputations that are true. Under the uniform defamation legislation in Australia, this defence is sometimes called "​justification"​. To satisfy this defence, the imputations must be true in substance, though some small, immaterial inaccuracies will not defeat the defence. Defendants may experience evidentiary issues in proving the truth of the allegations. The defence will fail if a reasonable person would draw untrue inferences from the statements made. Under the Australian statutes, proof that a person was convicted of an offence is conclusive evidence that they committed the offence and so it will not be defamatory to make such a statement. In Queensland, the statutory defence of justification is available under s 25 of the //​Defamation Act 2005// (Qld). A complete defence arises for any defamatory imputations that are true. Under the uniform defamation legislation in Australia, this defence is sometimes called "​justification"​. To satisfy this defence, the imputations must be true in substance, though some small, immaterial inaccuracies will not defeat the defence. Defendants may experience evidentiary issues in proving the truth of the allegations. The defence will fail if a reasonable person would draw untrue inferences from the statements made. Under the Australian statutes, proof that a person was convicted of an offence is conclusive evidence that they committed the offence and so it will not be defamatory to make such a statement. In Queensland, the statutory defence of justification is available under s 25 of the //​Defamation Act 2005// (Qld).
  • cyberlaw/intermediaries_defamation.txt
  • Last modified: 2 weeks ago
  • by nic