Threats of legal action against Australian tech site zGeek highlight the problems of defamation in the information age. What do you do to keep yourself safe online, and who should shoulder the blame?
Australian tech commentary site zGeek is currently in the middle of legal action relating to comments posted by its users on the site. While it’s (understandably) a little quiet on details, the following statement is currently running at zgeek.com:
Hi all,
It is well documented that ZGeek has been harassed with legal action since 2010. Unfortunately, we are once again being sued. This time around; ZGeek is named in a defamation suit along with the co-defendant, Google. We are being sued for user comments on the site and Google is being sued for listing these in their search results.
Our message is, we are seeking any NSW based lawyer who can help us to fight these erroneous claims. The person suing us seems keen to go ahead, they have even planned to move interstate to sue me (now that’s commitment!).
This case is very important; if we are found liable, all webmasters in Australia will be liable for their user comments. Basically this is Australia’s version of SOPA. If they win, no webmaster is going to allow free comments on Australian based sites as they could be sued.
So it’s important for us to find a lawyer ASAP. Or the only person going to be defending your freedom of speech online is me. I’m a person that is excellent at technology and computers, but my law skills are a little lacking.
It’s an interesting case; while I’m not a lawyer either, I’m not entirely sure that it is indeed Australia’s version of SOPA. Publisher liability for user comments is still (to the best of my understanding) a rather grey area as there’s not a whole lot of decided case law on the subject, especially online where retractions can be swiftly enacted and offending comments deleted — which is sometimes all that’s needed to defuse a costly legal situation.
Still, at the same time, as the editor of Gizmodo Australia, it does make me nervous. Australia’s got some of the most stringent defamation laws anywhere in the world. We were home to the infamous Dow Jones vs Gutnick case, for example, and a similar case was threatened against Whirlpool (though that one was ultimately not pursued). Equally, while there’s no specific law surrounding online communication, it’s clear that if singled out, being sued might be only the latest in a long string of worries you might face.
Liability’s a tricky thing, but based on many of the comments that are submitted, there’s a lot of posters who don’t particularly consider defamation issues when posting. What’s your take on this, and how careful are you about what you post online?
[zGeek]
Image: Wiki Public Art
Jim
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:36 AMSadly, I think the truth of the matter is that if this case does go ahead, and zGeek lose, then a precedent has been set. That would essentially mean that the case outcomes could be easily referred to in subsequent matters. I hope common sense prevails and web masters aren’t held responsible for the actions of their users.
CGB
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:36 AMi’d take the 5th… if Australia actually gave you that option :)
attila
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:56 AMThe right to silence exists in Australia.
wsDK_II
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:44 AMI say what i want. I like how Giz posts most of my comments. I wish everyone was allowed to say what they want without fear of censorship.
Finally, if this does go ahead, Giz wont be able to post comments, meaning i cant pay out apple users :(
Rowan
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 11:37 AMBut do you only say what you like because of perceived anonymity?
wsDK_II
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 11:52 AMNo, i am true to myself everywhere i go – i am happy with who i am, even though some of my thoughts are not popular with the majority. At the end of the day i would rather stay true to my beliefs then say something to go along with the majority.
and yes it has gotten me into trouble with HR sometimes, but lucky for me my managers are on my side :P
MotorMouth
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 12:04 PMI’m the same but it amazes me how you can say something to someone at the pub and no-on bats an eyelid, yet a similar comment on-line can get you banned from a site. It seems that everyone reads something and believes it is being addressed solely to them when usually it is specific to another comment or just a general observation aimed at no-one in particular. It seems that once it is written it takes on new meaning.
Antipodean
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 12:13 PMYes, your homophobia was well documented yesterday, keep up the good work bud!
wsDK_II
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 1:25 PMNo, not homophobia – i simply believe that if someone doesnt want to be touched by another person who could potentially see them as a sexually interesting, they should be allowed that choice. It doesnt matter if they are gay or not BTW.
Trishool
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 2:50 PMIf this goes ahead, more than likely you will be able to say what you want on those sites that choose to hire a moderator and have each and every comment moderated against strict guidelines before being published.
Uncle Bob
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:47 AMWhomever this moron is that is suing ZGeek, needs a good couple of kicks to the balls from Bruce LeeRoy. It is simply stupid. One butt hurt fool doesn’t really understand what they are potentially starting.
If it comes before a judge to see if it is case worthy, then the judge should bitch slap them all, and tell them to fuck off.
I know these comments are not really helpful or insightful, but that’s the point of this entire thing isn’t it?
Danny Allen
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 4:07 PM+1 for the UFC reference. -2 for the kick to the balls ;)
Kent
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:56 AMIf they rule in favour of the plaintiff, I’ll an hero.
Robb
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 11:03 AMIf you’re going to An Hero please go out in a way that does maximum damage to these idiots :)
Mac
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 11:23 AMAnd how about if they rule in favour of the defendant, you go back to school.
Rich
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 11:37 AMSomeone’s never heard of “An hero”…
Rowan
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 11:40 AMAs owner of a large automotive fan forum, this sort of stuff is worrying. I don’t have the resources to monitor every post.
I have previously looked into some sort of insurance that would cover us in the event of such a claim…and it’s not really that much help.
I will keeping an eye on this one!
Nimbers
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 12:03 PMI know the owner of ZGeek. What he has not said publicly is how he’s been in a two year legal battle with this person. They are trying to force a gag order on him so he can’t tell the public about this.
The Joker
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 6:20 PMAbsolutely ridiculous. Its like suing a paper manufacturer for what’s printed on the paper. If the post was from an employee and misrepresented the facts then I could possibly see a case but IMHO the only action should possibly have been a request to take down the article and if ignored, well then you have to be prepared to take on the defendent.
Grim
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 12:10 PMSo uh… who’s suing them and what were the infringing comments? I can’t find any info on it (not that I’m looking too hard).
Antipodean
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 12:17 PMI’d hardly call zgeek a decent tech site anyhow, they mostly pander to hormone filled teenagers. The stories they run are mainly there for show
NotAZGeeker
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 1:50 PMYour mum panders to hormone filled teenagers. LOLOLOL!!1one.
Antipodean
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 2:05 PMOh yeah,… Well… you stink….
NotAZGeeker
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 2:54 PMYeah well, that’s just like… Your opinion, man.
S0ULphIRE
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 3:18 PMhi-five Dude!
Antipodean
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 4:21 PMYou guys just made my mum mad!
Adz
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 12:46 PMIf ZGeek lose, couldn’t this mean that say Twitter could be sued for a user’s comments?
RooBoy
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 12:57 PMYup and its happened already:
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2012/02/brazil-is-suing-twitter-for-tweeting-dui-checkpoints/
Ozoneocean
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 1:11 PMIf this wins it would mean that less Aussie sites would allow comments and those that do would be pretty stringent about deleting them if they thought they were at all controversial…
I’m so glad I run a US site instead.
Turd Furguson, Esq.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 2:00 PMI did find this. Maybe it has something to do with it?
http://www.zgeek.com/content.php/37-Greg-Smith-Jonathan-Nolan-of-Myrmidon-Enterprises-vs-ZGeek
Reasonable Bystander
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 3:48 PMWebmasters can already be held liable for the comments of their forum members in certain circumstances. For example if a Notice is sent to them under the Broadcasting Standards Act complaining of offending material on their site AND they fail to take remedial action as necessary (NOT necessarily as demanded mind you) then they can be held liable for the damage caused by the offending comments including in defamation.
Best Policy – Get your lawyers to give you an overview of your responsibilities as a web host before you open your forum to the public or at worst before you allow unmoderated content. At least that way you will not be held liable for someone elses rant.
Incidentally ZGeek rock! As do anyone who helps them out because this issue goes far beyond the freedom to express oneself freely and openly in Australia. This is the thin end of the wedge of the conservative right trying to shut down the freedoms which we have so long cherished in this great country of ours and for which our forefathers fought and died and committed atrocities to defend.
I shall rant no more lest I offend and get hauled over the coals by some disaffected right wing fool with overly delicate sensibilities..
Rabid Cat
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:32 PMDon’t blame the conservative political right, blame the cororates and bolshie agenda, copyright by treaty etc. In AUS, each party will do as ‘directed’ come an event.
Okibi
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 5:05 PMI have an Australian based forum, i’ve been threatened with legal action for removing offensive comments. Guess you’re dammed if you do and dammed if you don’t. I’ll be watching this case with interest.
Reasonable Bystander
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:32 PMMy advice in those circumstances then Okibi, for what it’s worth, is develop a relationship with a lawyer. The ZGeek guys, according to the website, have Clamenz Corporate and Reardon & Associates and those relationships appear to have served them well along with EFA.
Anyway, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound (or more) of cure and being forearmed is worth the few hundred bucks you’d throw at tthe lawyers to get you that way rather than throwing hundreds of thousands at the litigation meatgrinder against an opponent who probably has not much in the way of assets to recover against and is probably representing themselves.
Cut that stuff off at the pass. Get smart and get systemised and that is the only protection you really can afford these days unless you are backed by someone with very deep pockets.
Peace out!
Unreasonable Bystander
Wednesday, February 8, 2012 at 9:49 AMI will not make any comments here just in case it gets Gizmodo sued.