Delfi AS v Estonia: The Liability of Secondary Internet Publishers for Violation of Reputational Rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.
In October 2013, the European Court of Human Rights in Delfi AS v Estonia upheld a decision of the Estonian Supreme Court to impose liability on the owners of an internet news portal for defamatory comments which had been posted on their website by anonymous third parties. This note suggests that th...
| Publicado en: | Modern Law Review Vol. 77; no. 4; pp. 619 - 641 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Jul2014
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=96925174&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 96925174 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00267961 D8H jtl: Modern Law Review issn: 00267961 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Jul2014 vid: 77 iid: 4 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 96925174 10.1111/1468-2230.12081 ppf: 619 ppct: 22 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 109KB tig: atl: Delfi AS v Estonia: The Liability of Secondary Internet Publishers for Violation of Reputational Rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. aug: au: Cox, Neville su: European Court of Human Rights Human rights Legal liability Statutory interpretation Libel & slander lawsuits Public interest Obligations (Law) European Union countries sug: subj: European Union countries European Court of Human Rights Human rights Legal liability Statutory interpretation Libel & slander lawsuits Public interest Obligations (Law) keyword: Defamation freedom of speech internet publication privacy Reputation ab: In October 2013, the European Court of Human Rights in Delfi AS v Estonia upheld a decision of the Estonian Supreme Court to impose liability on the owners of an internet news portal for defamatory comments which had been posted on their website by anonymous third parties. This note suggests that the decision is important in the context of publications with a 'public interest' element to them, because it appears to afford more protection to the right to reputation (deriving from the Article 8 right to privacy) and less to freedom of expression than was formerly the case. It is further argued that the Court's emphasis on the positive obligation of states to protect this right to reputation may mean that the existing English law in this area, including, potentially section 5 of the Defamation Act 2013, is inconsistent with the ECHR jurisprudence. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Modern Law Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Modern Law Review holder: Wiley-Blackwell dt: @attributes: year: 2014 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|