The New Defamation Bill – Will ISP’s really be required to give up a trolls details voluntarily??

Much has been made in the press this about the new proposals in the Defamation Bill and the fact that ISP’s, under new government proposals, will be required to provide victims with the identity of offenders who post abusive and defamatory online messages about them. This in itself is not technically true.

The draft defamation bill makes a big deal about the new procedure that ISP’s will have to follow before alleged online material is to be taken down. The bill describes the differentiation between identifiable material, by means of authorship and unidentifiable material i.e. an ISP, following a complaint made on ‘identifiable material’ must immediately place a notice against the material stating that it is subject to challenge. Under the new procedure an ISP must immediately remove alleged defamatory material from an unidentifiable author. This may seem great on paper, but let’s think about it practically. A person goes online as ‘John Spyrou’, ‘Rupinder Bains, ‘Lord Alan Sugar’ or ‘Donald Trump’, they are likely not the real person, however does this could as identifiable material – merely because there is a name next to it? The draft defamation bill does not make this clear. And therefore if it is unclear how can it be enforced. Answer – it cannot be.

Also any requirement on ISP’s to identify internet trolls or offending posters by giving details of their electronic signature, without a specific Court Order, is questionable. Any such requirement is arguably incompatible with the Data Protection Act, Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002 not to mention basic human rights such as right to privacy and freedom of speech.

Furthermore, internet trolling does not always amount to defamation and the term is usually reserved for those perpetrating harassment on innocent internet users. The government appears to have been caught up in the media hype surrounding trolling and so is using the word for all and sundry.  So how the government plans to deal with the similarities/discrepancies between the trolls and outright defamers is again unclear. 

I will save the jurisdictional issues concerning US corporations like Google and Facebook for another time.

In summary, the material bandied in the press is slightly premature and should be treated with caution. For now, to identify online offenders the Court is who we should ask for help. 

John Spyrou

Bains Cohen Solicitors

Internet Reputation Tip Of The Day

Online Defamation Blog « Internet Law Expert:

The internet works in a strange way. Each time your reply to an online comment, you are fuelling its popularity. This is because you are introducing new material on the same topic.
The search engines, and in particular Google give priority to ‘live’ issues which means that each time a comment is being added to a thread, it helps the thread to climb up the search engines’ ladder, which ironically is exactly the opposite of the result that you would want to achieve.
Furthermore, (and this is from my experience as a soldier)

Read More On Internet Defamation Lawyer

Internet Blackmail And Extortion Of Men On The Internet

UPDATE TO Grooming Of Men On The Internet. Seriously…..

Further to the warning issued by Bains Cohen in March 2011, John spyrou has issued the following important ALERT:

Internet Traps

We have recently been instructed by a number of men who have fallen victim to an advanced honey trap set by a gang operating in various online chat rooms, targeting men over 40 years old. In particular, this has been emanating from the Lycos 40+ chat room.

READ MORE ON

Internet defamation lawyer' blog

Internet Defamation Lawyer Tip Of The Day

"There is an old saying that “the first step to getting out of a hole is to stop digging”. If you discover that your online reputation has been tarnished on a rough website and that bad results are appearing against your name upon every Google search, do yourself a favour and overcome the natural tendency of constantly clicking on the link to the bad result. A defamatory remark on the internet is similar to a toothache – we feel almost a compulsive need to touch and feel the pain – in case it has already gone without us noticing it.
Read more on internet defamation lawyer blog

Gold Dust Under the Radar™ Internet Defamation Lawyer's Tools

Some internet posts are very old, perhaps they were first published on the internet 10-15 years ago. So why should you be bothered with the presence of historic postings on the internet, postings which you are told no one is likely to see anyway?

The answer is simple. Internet content is being recycled all the time. People who run websites, the sole purpose of which is to display advertising, are very often too lazy to create their own original new content. So instead, they find old content and use it to make money.

Read More on Internet Defamation Lawyer Blog