Cyberlibel is defamation on the internet, raising legal issues of free speech, public figures, and anonymity. Cyberdefamation laws are evolving, with some wanting regulation and others viewing it as a unique medium for free speech.
Cyberlibel is a slogan for defamation that occurs across the Internet, in forums, emails, blogs, chat rooms, personal websites, or other published articles. Libel, in real life, means that someone has communicated a false and damaging statement to a third party that does verifiable damage to the reputation of the defamed person. Because cyberlibel occurs in cyberspace, it raises legal issues of free speech, public figures, opportunities to refute statements, and anonymity that could warrant new laws and regulations.
Traditionally, defamation through newspapers, magazines, flyers or letters distinguished between a public figure and a private one. That is, a public figure such as a politician has fewer privacy expectations regarding activities than he does. Also, it is easier for him or her to publicize their response or defense to harmful information to correct public opinion. Yet an individual who is not in the public eye has greater protection than his or her reputation. Since they can’t easily reach people who have learned disinformation, they are more likely to win a defamation lawsuit.
The difference with cyberlibel is that it actually makes otherwise private figures public, via websites that many people access. Also, defamation laws are determined by state and jurisdiction, but there are no geographic limits to information on the Internet. Analysts studying cyberlibel have only a few cases in the United States on which to base their opinions, and these cases are contradictory. For example, they comment on the responsibility of an original writer, such as a blogger, versus a distribution outlet, such as a host server or bulletin board who may or may not have control over editing.
Cyberdefamation laws are still evolving around the world. Some systems view the Internet as a unique medium for free speech and the democratic dissemination of information, while others want the web to be regulated like other means of publication, such as newspapers. Some cite how easy it is to correct the record by posting your own blog post, article or bulletin board response which reduces the need for legal protection of your reputation. Others want Internet service providers to take more accountability and responsibility for the quality of information posted through their hosting. It may take decades for these questions to gain judicial precedent in the United States.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
