|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:50 pm Post subject: U.S. Lawmakers Working on Bill Opposing "Libel Tourism& |
 |
|
Article here.
| Quote: |
Senior US lawmakers unveiled legislation Tuesday to shield US journalists, authors and publishers from "libel tourists" who file suit in countries where they expect to get the most favorable ruling.
"England, Brazil, Australia, Indonesia and Singapore are just a few of the countries whose weak libel protections have attracted libel lawsuits against American journalists and authors," said Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy.
"This threat to American free speech must end, and the time to act is now," Leahy, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, said as he unveiled the bill with the panel's top Republican, Senator Jeff Sessions.
The measure would prevent US federal courts from recognizing or enforcing a foreign judgment for defamation that is inconsistent with the first amendment of the US Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech.
That cherished amendment, backed by a series of US Supreme Court decisions, makes it harder to win a libel suit in the United States relative to many other countries.
"This bipartisan legislation guarantees that a foreign defamation judgment cannot be enforced in the United States if that country's libel standards are inconsistent with American law," said Leahy.
The bill is "a needed first step to ensure that weak free-speech protections and abusive legal practices in foreign countries do not prevent Americans from fully exercising their constitutional right to speak and debate freely," said Sessions.
Leahy's office pointed to Internet publication as a leading cause of a rise in libel lawsuits "regardless of whether the writer or publisher has any significant connections to the foreign forum."
"The lawsuits are often filed in countries with weak free speech protections, increasing the filer's chance of prevailing," it said in a statement. |
I've heard about something like this before, so I guess not much progress has been made on it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So the Australia court decided that people have a right to sue in their own nation, while the U.S. law in question would say, "Go ahead, but American will not take part in enforcing any verdict you reach if your defamation standards don't match ours, nor will we even recognize it."
Are you saying you disagree with the bill in question? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 12:03 am Post subject: Re: U.S. Lawmakers Working on Bill Opposing "Libel Tour |
|
|
| Quote: |
| "This bipartisan legislation guarantees that a foreign defamation judgment cannot be enforced in the United States if that country's libel standards are inconsistent with American law," said Leahy. |
I don't know what rock I've been sleeping under, but I had no idea that this was possible to begin with. How many times has a foreign law that's inconsistent with American laws been imposed on American citizens? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
So the Australia court decided that people have a right to sue in their own nation, while the U.S. law in question would say, "Go ahead, but American will not take part in enforcing any verdict you reach if your defamation standards don't match ours, nor will we even recognize it."
Are you saying you disagree with the bill in question? |
I don't yet know if I disagree with the bill in question. I am suspicious.
Generally, America will enforce judgments made by foreign courts. There are several reasons. First, it encourages suits in places outside the U.S., which may be the most appropriate forum(s), and thus prevents overcrowding of American courts. Second, respecting foreign judgments increases the likelihood that foreign countries will respect American judgments. Third, in a great many cases, foreign courts should apply their law when the conduct arises in their jurisdiction.
Now, I think at most, the Australian suing the American newspaper for libel only challenges the third rationale. Nevertheless, if we look forward, it may only challenge it in appearance. Just because the libelous conduct arises in America, doesn't mean the damage is confined to America. Gutnick lived in Victoria. His residence was in Victoria. His associates and his life were centered in Victoria. The damage to his reputation belonged in Victoria. Why shouldn't we apply Australian law? As a plaintiff, there is a strong presumption that the home forum is the best forum (see the forum non conveniens doctrine).
I look askance at the proposed law. We already have the common law forum non conveniens doctrine. It was applied correctly and to a sensible result in the Gutnick case. So why pervert it with a statutory complication? Presumably to protect journalists.
But maybe they need the protection.
| Quote: |
Leahy's office pointed to Internet publication as a leading cause of a rise in libel lawsuits "regardless of whether the writer or publisher has any significant connections to the foreign forum." |
Yes, that's true. But as an example, let's say I sell a weapon to someone who travelled from Timbuktu to purchase it, and I know that person will use it maliciously. Later the person uses it to kill, and I am brought to action in Timbuktu, my significant connection to that forum is the weapon. I would say it is a significant connection.
When the journalist writes an article about a foreign individual, the journalist should consider that some information is potentially damaging to that individual's reputation. But then again, there may be possibilities where the journalist is unaware of the stark difference in libel law, and that may ensnare him (but more importantly his newspaper) in liability.
| Quote: |
| "The lawsuits are often filed in countries with weak free speech protections, increasing the filer's chance of prevailing," it said in a statement. |
I'd like to see a list of lawsuits filed.
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| How many times has a foreign law that's inconsistent with American laws been imposed on American citizens? |
I presume you mean, how many times has such a law been imposed on American citizens who never availed themselves of the foreign forum? Its a good question, and another which I'd like Sen. Leahy to answer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
