Comments on: Reviews and defamation – Australia's current case

By: Goldie

Goldie — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:18:08 +0000

Thanks for the update Duncan. Really it was inevitable that 2Clix would end up the loser with a damaged repuation after trying to sue Whirlpool.
I think people now are so used to posting their thought and opinions on everything from books on Amazon to computers, cars etc- basically there's forums, blogs and review sites all over the web with people posting their opinions both positive and negative. Anyway now to see how the restaurant review case pans out!

By: Duncan

Duncan — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 06:26:16 +0000

The news is out that 2Clix has dropped its legal action against Whirlpool (referred to by Goldie, above).
News article

By: Goldie

Goldie — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 11:31:16 +0000

Thanks for the info – it will be interesting to see how both the Whirlpool and the above mentioned Coco Roco court case will pan out. I'll keep an eye on your site in case you find out the results from either case!

By: Duncan

Duncan — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 02:30:37 +0000

I guess there are two sides to this. (1) Suing to suppress (truthful) negative commentary, and (2) suing after malicious commentary. Because restaurant/food reviewing is so frequently influenced by personal preference and often worded to shock, it's easier for an offended party to feel they are justified in suing (2). There's much more potential subjectivity/bias in food reviewing than in the Whirlpool case, where the commentary seems to have been of the 'this doesn't function' kind. On the face of it, 2Clix might well be attempting (1).

Nonetheless, we can't forget that the internet is crawling with people who seek to abuse and disparage others (either as so-called trolls or people who can't engage in rational discussion). Freedom of speech is easily abused by these people.

Just as an aside, Australians don't have an explicit right to freedom of speech, as far as I know. All assumptions of such freedoms come from the courts, which have at times decided there are implied rights in the constitution.

I haven't heard of the law in the US that you mention, Goldie. I believe that some jurisdictions protect ISPs from being sued for content hosted on their sites.

By: Goldie

Goldie — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:46:56 +0000

And yet it continues. Last week I read about Whirlpool now being potentially sued by 2Clix as people have been writing negative comments about their software on Whirlpool's forums. It seems to have become commonplace in Australia – don't like what people have to say about your business online? Then sue! Apparently in the US they have a law that was passed just a few years ago to protect websites – perhaps Australia needs to introduce something similar – and fast! Freedom of speech is going to fast become a luxury rather than a right in this country. http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22405674-2,00.html

By: cearta.ie » Blog Archive » Unpalatable - defamatory restaurant reviews

cearta.ie » Blog Archive » Unpalatable - defamatory restaurant reviews — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 12:28:00 +0000

[...] attacks freedom of the press"), the Breakfast Blog, The Expat, Grumpy Old Journo, Infordurex, Syrup & Tang have all joined it. Indeed, almost as answer to the question posed above by emediawoorx, Syrup [...]