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 against relatively innocuous-sounding websites and their operators—a site for nursing

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll