Suing Wikipedia For Libel

This case looks interesting:

Barbara Bauer, a literary agent, is suing the Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, for defamation. She claims a comment appeared on the website that branded her the “dumbest” literary agent.

Unfortunately, she's doing it wrong. Suing for libel in the US is very difficult and the damges aren't all that great either. What you really want to do is sue in the English courts, where the defendant has to prove the truth of the allegations. The pay outs are also pretty good.

So, how do we convert a case between an American and an American website into something justiciable in the UK? Very simply indeed, we just get someone in the UK to read the article on their computer.

Yes, we do have a rather odd situation here. For the definition of "publication" is that loading of the page into the browser. I think the logic runs that there's still a copy on the server, but now there's another in the browser (and probably somewhere in cache and thus the hard drive) so as we had one and now two thus there has been publication. The same logic applies to child pornography: it's not possession that people are charged with, but creation: the downloading is in this view creation, despite most people thinking that actually was the bloke with the camera alone.

Excellent, so, now we've got our UK based reader, publication has taken place in the UK and we can sue: oodles of damages to arrive real soon now.

I must remember that the next time someone vandalises (sorry, edits in an unflattering manner) my own Wikipedia entry.

Actions: Print this article   |   Email to a friend   |   Permalink   |   Comments (1)

Post this entry to:   del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Advertisement

Spectator Business | Apollo Magazine

Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms

Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP

All Articles and Content Copyright ©2008 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved