|
''Keith-Smith v Williams'' is a 2006 English libel case that confirmed that existing libel laws applied to internet discussion.〔(Warning to chatroom users after libel award for man labelled a Nazi ), Owen Gibson, 23 March 2006, The Guardian〕 It was seen as important because it was seen as the first UK internet libel case that represented two individuals rather than one party being an Internet Service Provider,〔"In Keith-Smith v Williams, the Claimant a former UK Independence party member has been awarded 10,000 GB Sterling and is important as it represents probably the first case of two private individuals at court as well as the use or abuse of blogging." (Libel on the Internet? ), Michael Coyle, Lawdit Solicitors〕 and was the first British case involving a successful prosecution of an individual poster within a chat room.〔(Chat room insults lead to internet libel victory )〕〔(more about that UK libel decision ), cybersoc.com〕 The ''Manchester Evening News'' claimed that this contradicted a common assumption among bloggers that it was the publisher and not the writer who was responsible for any libel claims that they may generate.〔(Bloggers beware of libel trials ) by Simon Donohue, Friday, 24 March 2006〕 Mark Stephens, the head of media law at Stephens Finer Innocent, characterised the case as "a dark day for freedom of speech with broad implications",〔(Verdict casts dark cloud over freedom of speech ), Times, 22 March 2006〕 which was denied by the plaintiff Michael Keith Smith.〔(Free speech and internet law ), Letters to the Editor, Times, 28 March 2006〕 The case involved unemployed ex-teacher Tracy Williams falsely accusing a former UKIP candidate, Michael Keith Smith, of being a sexual offender and racist bigot.〔(Online libel costs woman £10,000 ), BBC, 22 March 2006〕 Williams had posted as Gosforth.〔(legal case transcript )〕 The court ordered her to pay £10,000 plus costs.〔(UKIP candidate wins £10,000 for internet libel )〕〔(Damages on Online Defamatory Statements in UK ) EDRI.org〕 Although the accusations were made in a Yahoo discussion group with about 100 members, damages were awarded as the remarks were available throughout the world.〔(Smith v Williams (UK, 2006) ) Caslon Analytics〕 ==References== 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「Keith-Smith v Williams」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|