|
In a legal context, a chilling effect is the inhibition or discouragement of the legitimate exercise of natural and legal rights by the threat of legal sanction.〔chilling effect. (n.d.). Retrieved October 19th, 2011, from http://law.yourdictionary.com/chilling-effect〕 The right that is most often described as being suppressed by a chilling effect is the US constitutional right to free speech. A chilling effect may be caused by legal actions such as the passing of a law, the decision of a court, or the threat of a lawsuit; any legal action that would cause people to hesitate to exercise a legitimate right (freedom of speech or otherwise) for fear of legal repercussions. When that fear is brought about by the threat of a libel lawsuit, it is called libel chill.〔Green, A. (2009, October 15). Banish the libel chill. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/oct/15/simon-singh-libel-laws-chiropractic〕 A lawsuit initiated specifically for the purpose of creating a chilling effect may be called a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, or more commonly called; a "SLAPP suit." "''Chilling''" in this context normally implies an undesirable slowing. Outside of the legal context in common usage; any coercion or threat of coercion (or other unpleasantries) can have a chilling effect on a group of people regarding a specific behavior, and often can be statistically measured or be plainly observed. For example the news headline "''Flood insurance () spikes have chilling effect on some home sales'',"〔October 15, 2013, WWL‑TV Eyewitness News Headline: (Flood insurance spikes have chilling effect on some home sales. ) "Realtors say (spikes are ) already causing home sales to fall through when buyers realize they can’t afford the flood insurance." Retrieved Jan 26, 2014〕 and the abstract title of a two‐part survey of 160 college students involved in dating relationships: "The chilling effect of aggressive potential on the expression of complaints in intimate relationships."〔Communication Monographs, Volume 60, Issue 3, 1993 Denise H. Clovena & Michael E. Roloffb pages 199-219 "THE CHILLING EFFECT OF AGGRESSIVE POTENTIAL ON THE EXPRESSION OF COMPLAINTS IN INTIMATE RELATIONSHIPS" (Abstract, by DH Cloven - 1993 -Published online: 02 Jun 2009 ) - (Cited by 99) "A two‐part survey of 160 college students involved in dating relationships.... This chilling effect was greater when individuals who generally feared conflict anticipated aggressive repercussions (p < .001), and when people anticipated symbolic aggression from relationally independent partners (p < .05)."〕 ==Usage== In United States and Canadian law, the term ''chilling effects'' refers to the stifling effect that vague or excessively broad laws may have on legitimate speech activity. However, the term is also now commonly used outside of American legal jargon, such as the chilling effects of high prices〔 or of corrupt police, or of "anticipated aggressive repercussions" (in say, personal relationships〔). A chilling effect is an effect that reduces, suppresses, discourages, delays, or otherwise retards reporting concerns of any kind. An example of the "chilling effect" in Canadian case law can be found in ''Iorfida v. MacIntyre'' where the constitutionality of a criminal law prohibiting the publication of literature depicting illicit drug use was challenged. The court found that the law had a "chilling effect" on legitimate forms of expression and could stifle political debate on issues such as the legalization of marijuana.〔Iorfida v. MacIntyre, 1994 CanLII 7341 (ON SC)at para. 20, Recognition that a law may allow for a ''chilling effect'' as a vehicle for political libel or vexatious litigation provides motivation to change such defamation laws, and therefore prevent censorship and the suppression of free speech. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Chilling effect」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|