This document defines and discusses key elements of defamation law. Defamation involves harming someone's reputation through false statements. To prove defamation, it must be shown that an identifiable person was subject to a defamatory statement that was published to others. Internet service providers can generally be held liable as publishers if defamatory content is hosted on their servers. However, they may argue that they did not have control over or knowledge of the content. The document also summarizes a landmark Australian defamation case, Gutnick v. Dow Jones, which established that defamation occurs where the damage to reputation takes place, not just where content is uploaded.

1. Defamation

2.  The act of making
statements or
suggestions that harm
someone's reputation
in the community.
(Cambridge,2010)
What is defamation?

3.  A defamatory imputation must be made
 The material must identify the complainant
 The material must be published to a third person
 All available defenses must be exhausted
Key elements to be proved

4.  Usually Internet service providers or internet content
hosts are liable as authors often have no money
 Things on internet are published in every jurisdiction
in the world.
Liability

5. In common law defendants requires to
prove that they :
• Had no actual knowledge of the
defamation
• Had no reason to believe the material
carried was defamatory ; and
• Was not negligent
ISPs must prove:
• They do not have the ability to control
internet content
ICHs cant use this as they are in control of
the content in most circumstances, so this
defense is not available.
Innocence

6.  A business man named Joseph Gutnick sued Dow Jones ( a US
corporation) in the Supreme Court of Victoria for damages for
defamation.
 The corporation published defamatory material about Gutnick on
its subscription online news site.
 There was a dispute about whether victoria was the appropriate
forum to hear the defamation claim because the article was
uploaded in New Jersey however downloaded in Victoria.
 The High Court of Australia unanimously held that defamation is
located at the place where the damage to reputation occurs.
 The case was settled with Gutnick receiving AUS $ 180 000 plus AUS
$400000 in costs .
 it was decided by applying existing principles of defamation law to
the internet
 Highlights difficulty in balance between countries
Case Study: Gutnick v Dow jones