This is the second part of a two part post discussing the relationship between Copyright and Freedom of Expression. Part 1 was published on Inforrm on 2 May 2012. Continue reading
The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog
Month: May 2013 (Page 5 of 5)
As we mentioned in a post last week the Defamation Act 2013 received Royal Assent on 25 April 2013. It is available on the “resources” section of the blog – although without the Explanatory Notes (which have still not been published). The 5RB website provides a short summary of the Act’s provisions. Continue reading
It is well known that a plaintiff has very little chance of getting an injunction to restrain the publication of defamatory matter. Courts will usually say that damages are an adequate remedy. It is also well known that the Defamation Act provides that, for the most part, a company cannot sue for defamation in Australia. So what does a company do? Injurious falsehood is the go. A company can sue if there is a false malicious publication and it causes actual financial loss to that company. Very difficult, especially proving malice and especially financial loss, but unlike defamation, the chance for an injunction is greatly increased. Continue reading
The recent Donald Ashby (sub nom Ashby Donald) decision of the European Court of Human Rights has revived interest in the relationship between copyright and freedom of expression. The litigation arose because two of the defendant photographers had put on their US website pictures taken by the third at the Paris fashion shows. Continue reading
On Monday 22 April 2013, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Human Rights held, by nine votes to eight, that the UK’s ban on political advertising on television did not violate Article 10. The majority opinion in Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom departed substantially from the Court’s previous case law on political advertising, and introduced a new method for reviewing the proportionality of such blanket-bans. Continue reading
The recent experience of Paris Brown, the 17-year-old who resigned before taking up her role as Kent’s Youth Police and Crime Commissioner following a furore surrounding comments she made on Twitter, demonstrates exactly the type of police activity that the Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer, was seeking to prevent when he issued prosecution guidelines (the “Guidelines“) in December of last year.
Recent Judgments
© 2026 Inforrm's Blog
Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑