Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Government The Courts News

UK Facebook User's Name Appropriation Draws Huge Libel Suit 165

Slatterz links to a story which shows that nowadays, it's sometimes possible to find out whether someone is a dog on the Internet, excerpting: "A freelance photographer is facing a £22,000 bill after setting up a fake Facebook page that libelled a former classmate. Grant Raphael, a freelance photographer, set up a Facebook page in the name of former school friend Mathew Firsht and posted false information about his sexual and political preferences. He also set up another page for Firsht's television company, the latter entitled 'Has Mathew Firsht lied to you?' ... 'The significance of this case is that it shows that what you post is not harmless, but has consequences,' media lawyer, Jo Sanders, of Harbottle & Lewis, told the BBC."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

UK Facebook User's Name Appropriation Draws Huge Libel Suit

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Profound news (Score:0, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 24, 2008 @07:36PM (#24327625)
    Shit, now I gotta stop claiming that Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda is a child molesting homo. Oh, I guess it's not libel if it's true.
  • Re:Libel in Britain (Score:5, Informative)

    by shalla ( 642644 ) on Thursday July 24, 2008 @08:00PM (#24327899)

    Libel in Britain tends to be taken more seriously than in the US. There is no automatic right to free speech (except on Speaker's Corner, where even the slander laws can't touch you) and the penalties aren't gentle - the satirical magazine Private Eye found that one out.

    Okay. Let's clear this sucker up. For the last damn time (in my dreams, eh?), your right to free speech in the US is your right to free speech AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT. You do not have the right to libel anyone or anything you want. The Constitution protects your right to make comments about the government, to agitate peacefully for government change, to seek redress, to petition the government, etc.

    When people say "I can say whatever I want! I'm entitled to my free speech!"? They're usually freaking morons. Unless they were talking to or about the government, it just ain't so. There are ramifications for what you say about other people or institutions.

  • Re:Libel in Britain (Score:5, Informative)

    by coljac ( 154587 ) on Thursday July 24, 2008 @08:13PM (#24328037) Homepage

    I don't think there's an exemption in slander laws for a particular corner of Hyde Park. Indeed, Wikipedia says:

    "A Speakers' Corner is an area where public speaking is allowed. The original and most noted is in the north-east corner of Hyde Park in London, England. Speakers there are allowed to speak as long as the police consider their speeches lawful. Contrary to mythology there is no immunity from the law, nor are any subjects proscribed. In practice the police tend to be tolerant and intervene when they receive a complaint or when they hear bad language."

  • Re:Libel in Britain (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 24, 2008 @08:16PM (#24328069)

    You do not have the right to libel anyone or anything you want

    But in the US, to show slander or libel, you have to show that you had a reputation to reduce, that your reputation was reduced, that this reduction in reputation caused you monetary damage, and that whatever was said about you was false. The standards are different in Britain.

  • not really true (Score:4, Informative)

    by commodoresloat ( 172735 ) * on Thursday July 24, 2008 @08:22PM (#24328147)
    It's not so much what you say, but who is doing the restricting. In other words, the first amendment says the government may not abridge the freedom to say whatever you want, not that you only have the right to speak against the government. It says the government may not restrict your speech. So a corporate entity or whatever may restrict your speech without running afoul of the Constitution but the government may not. That includes speech about things that have no political or governmental implications whatsoever. Libel is considered an exception to the first amendment, but proving libel requires certain things (that, as the original poster correctly pointed out, are different in the US than they are in Britain). But make no mistake about it -- a successful libel lawsuit is certainly a GOVERNMENT restriction of free speech.
  • Re:Profound news (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 25, 2008 @04:30AM (#24331451)

    They prefer detonating a truck load of fertilizer next to large office buildings.

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...