Defamation: civil or criminal matter?

Many legislations have a civil suit and a criminal charge for defamation. The article about Colorado US is interesting in comparison with the proposal in France to stop allowing defamation charges that do not bear for example any hatred.
"Does It Make Sense To Have Libel Be A Criminal Offense?" (TechDirt, 5 December 2008)

Diversity of laws - a dilemna?

Apparently somebody in the US - Florida was sanctionned for obscenity after prosecutors went forum shopping for the most stringent laws on the matter. Diversity of laws is not a new issue; comparative law is highly aware of it. Internet just increases the problem
"What Are 'Community Standards' When It Comes To Obscenity Online?" (13 October 2008)

Defamation in cyberspace - a reminder

Hardly surprising, but worth a reminder. Diffamation/libel still applies on cyberspace and more importantly, in some countries like France it is a criminal offence and does not engage civil liability. "Reminder: Defamation Still Applies To Bloggers" (29 September 2008)

Defamation, MySpace and fake profiles

Case rejected against those children who created a fake profile of their headmaster; lucky because in some countries like France defamation is a criminal matter not usually a civil law issue like in the US and UK (well criminal law does get involved but rarely).
Principal Loses Lawsuit Against Students and Parents Over Fake MySpace Page--Draker v. Schreiber (Eric Goldman - 22 august 2008)
Draker v. Schreiber, 2008 WL 3457023

But it does not mean disciplinary action cannot be taken. See "Judge Says School Can Suspend Student For Fake MySpace Page Of Principal" (19 September 2008)

A change of standard in the law? Sorry have not read yet the case, so can't comment much "UK High Court Recognizes That Defamation Standard Should Be Lowered For Online Forums" (11 August 2008) Judgment is available on the BBC website in PDF format

Jurisdiction issues

About an India Court's ordering Google to communicate a blogger's identity and the right to do so when author and offence are committed in the US with no material elements in India...
Absurd? Mr Masnik argues that the stricker laws get to be applied. Not far of the mark if we compare with the case of privacy where the European standards of privacy have overcome the American conception of privacy.
On the other hand, should the most liberal laws get the upper hand? An interesting problem of diversity and unity familiar to the comparatist

"Indian Court Demands Google Hand Over Anonymous Blogger's Identity" (15 August 2008)

Hacking (Nasa hacker) - jurisdiction and policies

The last hope of hacker McKinnon vanished today. The ECtHR rejected his emergency appeal from the House of Lords' decision on his extradition case. Obliged to be tried now in the US, Mr McKinnon faces an unenvious position in a country where plea bargaining is rife. Having refused the plea made to him, the sentence is likely to be less lenient, especially if the prosecution is exasperated by the litigation process.
Three things here interest me:

1. First, Mr McKinnon's admission that he hacked but to find documents on UFOs. In strict terms of criminal law, his motive (UFOs, pure fun, or terrorism) bears no influence on the existing offence. Mens rea, the mental component of an offence, discards motives which cannot be its component. Motives may come into play later, as an excuse (insanity for example) or justification. This is why the Asperger's syndrome argument becomes important as a ground for an excuse (constraint? barely insanity in today's understanding of the defence)
2. Second, the procedural aspect of the case. 95% of criminal cases end up in a plea; plea bargaining is supposed to be a transaction between two parties and a minimum of fairness is supposed to exist, rules of the Supreme Court. But the conception of fairness is relative, especially in the eyes of Europeans: American fairness in relation to plea bargaining is not often perceived, rightly or wrongly, as fairness in the sense of ENglish law or European Human Rights. Pressures are great to accept the plea and not to do so is taking a huge risk.
3. It is unclear what has been the attitude of the authorities. Pressure was claimed to have been exercised. Mistatements were supposedly made about the extent of the hack and its threat...

Overall, let's hope one thing: that Mr McKinnon's misapprehensions of his original actions does not cost him more than it is necessary. He should not be sanctioned for the symbol that some may want to see of him in the fight against cybercrime; he should be sanctioned for his actions only, not for political or policies reasons. He hacked into the computers; this is an offence. If hacking into governmental networks is an aggravating circomstance, fine; it is not, then he should be left alone.

"US: tackling cyber-crime" (22 August 2008)

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39475039,00.htm (28 August 2008)

http://www.crime-research.org/news/29.08.2008/3542/ (29 August 2008)

Earlier, "Nasa hacker to fight US extradition on Monday" (ZDNet.uk, 13 June 2008)

Jurisdiction, ISPs' liability and libel

According to the story, a British politician shut his blog for Google (US) refused to remove a defamatory post put on his blog and on others'.

What strikes me first is the line taken by Google. De facie, perfectly adequate, their response only highlights the double standard applied by the company and others to be fair. For if the request came from China and the like, previous experiences show that Google was quick in removing the post and even giving the dissident's details. Suddently, lack of jurisdiction was not an issue anymore. The difference only confirms that when big money is at stake, there is suddenly no legal obstacle on the way to satisfy greedy people.

Secondly, as pointed out by the author of the post, there were probably other ways of tackling the issue of libel if it was serious.
Thirdly, it highlights the problem of offensive contents: how to reconcile the global aspect of the net with regional differences?
"The Other Side Of The Jurisdiction Issue: UK Politician Upset That US-Based Blogs Follow US Laws" (7 March 2008) http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080305/193747455.shtml