Twitter sued for defamation down under

by 11 replies
13

And even though the defamation (see article) was posted on a US site, it can be argued that the defamation has occurred in Australia.





Mr Meggitt's lawyer, Stuart Gibson, served a legal notice yesterday on the San Francisco-based social media giant, a company valued last year at $US7 billion ($A6.5 billion), as the publisher of a tweet by Hardy last November."




Andrew
#off topic forum
  • Australia barely has an online presence, and this is a good way to get their citizens and ISP's blocked by all the major US companies. Way to go Aussie gov...
    • [2] replies
    • That was my first thought... Block them all, and let the dingos sort it out.


      Paul
    • Lol yep I agree
  • I agree it's a stupid law, and it stifles innovation in Australia.

    For example I've wanted to start a very large forum here for a few years but I think it's too risky to do so unless it has 100% moderation, and who wants to do that? Not me.
    However, note that if SOPA or similar laws are passed in the US you can expect similar problems there. ie you will want to moderate all user generated content to avoid legal headaches.


    But it is interesting to see that US web companies are being challenged by the laws of other countries, which doesn't happen often. It's usually the other way around.


    Andrew
  • Stupid law. Are Wall Mart, the Chadstone Shopping Centre, or shopping mall food court legally liable for what customers say? In myriad ways I admire Australia despite Vegemite, but that law is bonehead stupid.
  • I think it's a stupid law too But then again I think 50% of laws are stupid.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • In the US, I think like 90% are! Even most of those that would otherwise be good are trying to cover dumb exclusions, or repeating the sae thing handled elsewhere. And if we could have some decent laws, maybe we could have one set that is good in all 50 states.

      Steve
  • The law are stupid, but the people creating them are smart? LOL
  • That sounds similar to the kind of thing that could happen under the SOPA law that was being proposed recently. If you can hold a website responsible for everything that's published on it, freedom of expression is going to be shut down. If someone wanted to target a competitor, or anyone they didn't like, all they'd have to do is arrange to have something objectionable posted there and then report the site.
  • while the policy is internal, most debaters are external

    what do australians think?
  • I, for one, don't like the threat of being held to a law that isn't my own country's law. What if I have a person on my forum ditch Australia? I'm in the US and that shouldn't mean one rat to me. This international law stupidity has got to stop.
Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed

  • 13

    Twitter sued for defamation down under

    This should be interesting. Under Australian law website owners are publishers who are responsible for all of the content which appears on their sites, even user-generated content. It's not like the US laws which provide webmasters with "safe harbor" protections from nasty content posted by their users. And even though the defamation (see article) was posted on a US site, it can be argued that the defamation has occurred in Australia.