tortlaw

toc =Tort Law & The Internet=

Tort is another word for harm. Tort Law deals with issues with people. One person acts in a way that harms another. In considering content throughout cyberspace, this remains a vital part in order to protect the self from infringing rights of others.



Intentional vs. Unintentional
Intentional harm with people will be dealt with in a more serious manner than unintentional harm in court. But potentially all of us can get involved in harming others – i.e. getting into a car accident. Doctors carry the expectation of exercising appropriate care. What then, is the measure of appropriate care? Strict liability – regardless of whether you could do it or not, you should have not done it and you are liable for your act. There’s no reason to prove intentions - just doing it was enough.


 * __**Intentional Torts**__ || __**Unintentional Torts**__ ||
 * //Defamation//: making statements which disdain somebody (intent is present). || //Defamation//: making statements which disdain somebody (no intent is present) ||
 * //Passing off//: pretend to be something you’re not (to qualify for certain benefits), pretend to carry qualifications for a particular field in a situation. || //Negligence//: decision not to do something, don’t exercise care in actions. A duty of care that is breached has to be established. ||
 * //Conversion//: take somebody else’s things and use it, as in chattels (personal possessions, physical things). || ||
 * //Trespass//: property/land infringement. ||

Defamation
Defamation usually involves making reference to a certain individual, not so much an organization. However, if products about a company are stated, you are liable since it damages someone’s reputation by these references.

//Pre-internet distinctions:// Publisher/distributor: i.e. a newspaper publisher that published a story in which a person was defamed. If you make it clear the person is not stating facts, you are probably going to win. As an individual, it’s not defaming. But as a publisher, you’re making information broadly available and defaming that person. It is far more serious when published.

//Libel vs. Slander// The difference between written (libel) and spoken (slander). Spoken is transitory. On the Internet, one has to consider many possibilities to protect themselves from cases of defamation. If you put something on the website - is it libel or slander? Is it permanent? How many people can potentially see this?

Defamation Defenses
//Justification//: is it true? Different jurisdictions require different evidence to determine whether it is true.

//Privilege//: Absolute - I can make statements that are defamatory but I am privileged. I.e. In the House of Commons and in most parliaments. Relative - insulated from prosecutions if it does certain things. If a defamatory story is published and if any individual points out that these statements are false and you print a retraction (usually in the same page it was originally published), you will be protected from being prosecuted.

//Fair comment//: pertains to public figures. There is some laxity in what you can say about people and then there’s fair comment. Certain figures open themselves to the public domain and open themselves to others commenting on their character affecting their reputation. There are certain things that are clearly defamatory about women that can’t be said about men. There’s an extent on how much you can expose about public figures. You are most likely okay on judging the person as trustworthy or untrustworthy but pushing it by judging them as corrupt.

//The ‘innocent dissemination’// //defense:// distributors are responsible. I had no notion this was defamatory. I distributed it, but I had no idea that it was defamatory. I.e. website that links to another website that is defamatory. Are you a distributor or a publisher? Are you liable under the law? A defamatory forwarded e-mail might be taken to court for defaming the person. You have to prove two things: you didn’t know it was defamatory, and you didn’t have a duty of care (there wasn’t a duty to check to see if it is actually defamatory or not. If you place defamatory information on a website you will probably be judged as publishing it and be treated as that much. Equally if you forward it on, you are most likely going to be considered as publishing the email) companies should place terms and conditions on the website informing people to know how they are to behave/use information.

//*It is important to note that there are many uncertainties with law and the web. Similar cases may be treated differently based on jurisdiction, intent and so on as discussed above. It is thus important to be aware of defamation as a major consideration of protection when constructing the content of a site, since with the progression of cyberlaw we will see far more strict and universal consensus.//

=Works Cited=

Ferrera et al. (2004). CyberLaw: Text and Cases, //2 Edition//, Thomson Learning. Image (gavel): [|http://www.wcg.org/lit/gospel/4-Gavel%202%20copy.jpg] Image (libel): http://www.southwestern.edu/academic/writing/ Image (slander): http://www.portrait-artist.org/life-drawing-faces-pics/crichton-detail-mouth.jpg