INTERNET giant Google has lost a landmark legal battle that is expected to open the floodgates to online litigation against anonymous online commentators.
The Supreme Court in Australia ordered Google Australia to reveal details of the owner of a website which named an entrepreneur and self-help guru Jamie McIntyre a “thieving scumbag”, the Courier-Mail reported.
It is understood the website was not one of Google’s Blogs and that Google had obtained personal details of the owner of website through its advertising program.
Travis Burch, a private detective who was hired by Mr McIntyre to smoke out the website’s author so he could sue for defamation, said yesterday that it was “a good day for people who don’t frankly want to be defamed on the internet”. “We’ve done a lot of work in this area and identifying and pushing trying to expose people and tracking them down through records that they leave on the Internet,” Mr Burch said. “Having a win in courts just means we’re a couple of steps closer to bringing the person to a form of justice.” He added,“the content that appeared on that website and (has) been promoted through the website is blatantly defamatory.”
Australian Barrister John Bryson said he believed this was the first time legal action of this kind against Google had been successful in Australia. “People need to know that they can take on the big companies, the major players, and get a win,” Mr Bryson said.
Professor Michael Fraser
Reported in the CourierMail.com, leading communications law academic Professor Michael Fraser of the University of Technology, Sydney, said “The internet is a mainstream channel of communication now so it can’t just be like the wild west outside of the rule of law.” He added, “people can’t … be allowed to hide behind a cloak of anonymity…”
In a statement which is encouraging to victims of online defamation around the world, including UK victims of online defamation, Google Inc confirmed that it will always comply with the laws of the jurisdiction they operate in and so if a court requires them to provide the information, they will.
UK leading
Internet law expert Yair Cohen who works for the law firm Bains Cohen said today that
“although English courts are not obliged to bind themselves by decisions of Supreme Courts in other jurisdictions, decisions such as this could still be influential on our judges, who have very little local precedents available to them to help them come to the right decision in such cases of online defamation by individuals who choose to remain anonymous.
Tell us what you think!
If you post online what is considered by the subject of your comments to be defamatory comment – would you be happy for your identity to be revealed?
Should Facebook, Google and other operators of social networking be completed to provide personal details of their users- so that the court can decide whether or not your comments were defamatory?
Is it right or wrong to post anonymous online reviews about organisations and businesses?
Write Your Comment Now!
Like this:
Be the first to like this post.
Filed under: Internet Law Updates Tagged: | defamatory website, facebook defamation, google defamation, internet law expert, online defamation, sue for defamation, victim of online defamation, yair cohen
[...] Law Expert Google Must Disclose Anonymous User InformationIn a statement which is encouraging to victims of online defamation around the world, including UK [...]
A case waiting for judgment to be handed down in the UK Queens Bench Davison v Google was heard by Mr Justice Kenneth Parker July 26th and 27th.
Jurisdiction was granted to Ms Davison over Google Inc for Defamation on Google’s product Blogger making Google co-defendants with the authors on Blogger.
The Case was an appeal by Google against the Masters Order granting Jurisdiction.
This could be a UK landmark Judgment ending the nefarious use of US web hosts such as Google for defamation and harassment in contravention of European Human Rights and or e-commerce Laws and in breach of UK communications Act 2003
There are many websites and forums that have no connection to Google at all, so these will presumably not be affected at all by this decision?
I think the ramifications and implications of disclosure by Google Au will have very little impact in a more global context.
I think that in some cases it is more than reasonable for the company to try an obtain the personal details, in order bring the ‘troll’ to justice. In other cases the complete opposite.
I think in the first instance, the legal team needs to prove to the high court that their client is indeed being defamed and that the comments that have appeared are not, at all, true.
Before any legal proceedings begin against the ‘troll’, should their identity be found out, they should then have the chance to provide any evidence they have to ‘back-up’ their comments. I believe, the evidence could be of their own experience of dealing with the said person/company or evidence provided by numerous others they have come into contact with.
Your client however, that you have referred to previously, will have some struggle, as the BBC have evidence of wrong doing, which I’m sure they’d provide to the ‘trolls’, should this be necessary and clearly, this would have some impact.
Smaller businesses also need to be aware that finding out the names of ‘trolls’ could cost a small fortune, with no guarantee of finding out who they are.