header-logo header-logo

01 October 2009 / Veronica Bailey
Issue: 7387 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Web of lies

Veronica Bailey asks whether ISPs & search engines are liable for defamation on the internet

The decision in Metropolitan International Schools v Google ([2009] EWHC 1765 (QB), [2009] All ER (D) 263 (Jul) clarified the law on the liability of search engines and internet service providers (ISP’s) for defamation.

Eady J applied common law principles of defamation to the modern phenomenon of the internet to decide whether the operator of a search engine, Google, could be liable for publication.

Google finds information by automated means. It has no control over the search terms entered by its users or of the material which is placed on the world wide web. Eady J concluded that as there was no human intervention in the search function, Google was not liable as a publisher for the content found by the search.

Eady J followed his earlier decision in Blunt v Tilley [2006] IP & T 798 where he said that an ISP was not liable for defamatory content posted by individuals using its internet services. He concluded

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll