December 16, 2010
The UK libel law has been amended to include a defence of honest comment. This will strengthen the current defence of fair comment so that people leaving messages on places such as social networking sites, will not have to prove that their opinions have a full factual basis.
The amendment follows the Supreme Judgment of Spiller and another (Appellants) v Joseph and others (Respondents) [2010]. A booking agency struck a tribute band off its books, commenting that they were not professional enough to feature in its portfolio. The band sued for libel but on appeal, the Supreme Court found the agency not guilty, as the words constituted honest comment.
The judge explained that the change was necessary to bring libel into the internet age, where “millions now talk, and thousands comment in electronically transmitted words, about recent events of which they have learned from television or the internet.”
The essence of the change is that it is now no longer necessary for the maker of a comment to publish sufficient facts backing it up. In this case, the fact that the previous night’s celebrity show was mentioned in the comment was viewed as sufficient factual backing.
The merits of such a change are self-evident given the enormous propensity for libel prosecutions that could result from leaving comments on social networking sites, but, some commentators are worried that people will now be free to publish criticisms about any person, group or business with little objective basis. However, the comment must still have a basis in fact and be non-malicious and in the public interest for the defence to apply.
