header-logo header-logo

13 March 2008 / Nick Armstrong
Issue: 7312 / Categories: Features , Public , Legal services , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Blog and be damned?

Who is culpable when internet users insult or libel? Nick Armstrong looks at the state of the law

One of the most striking features of the internet is its use as a vehicle for criticism, personal attacks and the expression of downright hatred. This can extend from “flaming ”—hostile or insulting interaction between internet users—to websites and blogs whose sole purpose is to provide a forum for hatred or vilification of a particular individual or company. Typing “I hate” and the name of a well-known female singer into Google brought up 9.5 million search results. Even within the , typing “I hate” plus the name of a familiar leisure company produced over 750,000 search results. Searching for the same name and “are s**t” produced even more results.

However, much of the legal activity in has not concerned overt “hatred” sites—perhaps because allegations on such sites are more likely to be taken with a pinch of salt as mere irrational ranting. Recent cases have instead seen legal action taken

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Flint Bishop—Charlotte Harris

Flint Bishop—Charlotte Harris

Sheffield expansion continues with appointment of commercial property partner

Browne Jacobson—Paul Duggan

Browne Jacobson—Paul Duggan

Browne Jacobson strengthens banking and finance practice with latest partner appointment Paul Duggan

Ward Hadaway—Chris Piggott

Ward Hadaway—Chris Piggott

Employment partner joins Ward Hadaway

NEWS
The Law Society RFC Festival of Sport returns next month, bringing together legal and financial services professionals for one of the sector’s largest annual sporting events
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

back-to-top-scroll