Ruling
in Australia May Have Big Impact on Web News Sites
CANBERRA (Reuters) - Australia's highest court ruled Tuesday
that a defamation case sparked by a story on a U.S Web site could be heard in Australia,
opening a legal minefield for web publishers over which libel laws they must
follow. The landmark ruling that an article published by Dow Jones & Co was subject
to Australian law -- because it was downloaded in Australia - is
being watched by media firms as it could set a precedent for other cases. Dow Jones argued the case, brought by
Australian mining magnate Joseph Gutnick for an Internet version of an article
from Dow Jones' Barron's magazine, should be heard in the United States, where libel laws are considered relatively liberal. Debate centerd on whether an alleged defamation
was published in the U.S. state of New Jersey, where Dow Jones's web servers
are located, or in Victoria, where some readers saw the story. Gutnick, who has initiated defamation
proceedings in his home state of Victoria in Australia, was delighted with the
ruling. ``They'll have to be very
careful what they put on the net. The net is no different from a regular newspaper. You have to be careful what you
write,'' he told Australian television. A
disappointed Dow Jones said in a statement it would continue to defend the case
brought by Gutnick. Two Victorian
courts refused Dow Jones' application.
The publisher then appealed to the High Court of Australia, the country's
highest court, which unanimously dismissed its appeal. ``The court was asked to determine
where that article was published.
It has made no findings on the merits of the defamation action itself,''
the court said in a statement. Media Watching The ruling caught the eye of the media sector as it was
believed to be the first time a country's highest court has defined where
Internet publication takes place in a libel case. The court allowed 18 organizations to make submissions to the hearing, including Dow Jones, which also publishes the Wall Street
Journal, had argued that exposing Internet publishers to defamation suits in
jurisdictions where material is downloaded could lead to claims all over the
world and restrict freedom of speech.
But the court dismissed Dow Jones' concerns of multiple defamation
actions arising from one publication. It said a publisher could argue it should only have to defend
itself once. The court said a claim could be brought
only if the person had a reputation in the place where the material was
published
- in this case, Gutnick's home town of Melbourne. Dow Jones said it was encouraged the court ruling recognized
the ``novel, complex and global'' issues of Internet publication which the
publisher said needed international discussion. The executive director of Australia's Internet
Industry Association, Peter Coroneos, said the ramifications of the ruling were
profound for anyone publishing content on the Internet. ``However, the practicalities of
bringing legal actions could ultimately prevent the mass of suits that some
have feared,'' he said. http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-media-australia-internet.html Outgoing Mail Scanned by NAV 2002 |
- RE: Web sites and the courts Karen Watters Cole
- RE: Web sites and the courts Lawrence DeBivort
- RE: Web sites and the courts Cordell . Arthur
