> Today I came across a very interesting article on the front page of last Sunday's local paper. It's linked below, and deals with the issue of free speech on the internet and a lawsuit brought against "internet critics". Not critics of the internet, but people who expressed certain critical opinions of a company through an online discussion group. The article potentially brings to light many issues and questions, but three came to my mind first. I'd love to hear your general or specific thoughts about the lawsuit and/or opinions on these questions.
>
> Should the internet be treated the same way as any other medium in situations of libel?
>
> In an online context, it is hard to trace exactly who said what. What role does and should this 'anonymity factor' play?
>
> What are the lawsuit's implications for us -- both as individuals and as participants in the RinkWorks forum and chat?
>
> Gahalia

Well, in the case of online libel, there's been a fairly high-profile case brought up due to the Friends Reunited website (www.friendsreunited.co.uk) - it's one of those sites where you can find old schoolmates you lost touch with. Apparently this guy was dredging up the old playground rumours about teachers sleeping with people etc. and the teacher he named came right back and sued him for libel. He won.

People *can* be libelled over the net. However, if you ask me, there should be seperate libel laws for things put online, because they are far easier to remove and retract than, say, a headline on the front page of the News of the World. You can't exactly change the front page of a national newspaper a week after it's been on the stands. However, if the News of the World's website was displaying a headline like "Football Star In Six-In-A-Bed Scandal", they should first be given the chance to remove the headline and place an apology there. If they still stick to their guns and said player still believes he has been libelled, then the courts should get involved. The NotW does have a right to free speech, but the person it is making the allegations against also has the right not to have his character, personality and reputation unfairly damaged (not to mention the taunts of opposing crowds).

Zarn"if I missed anything out, tell me"iwoop