The Grand Chamber’s judgment delivered on 10 November 2015 in Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v. France elaborates on the appropriate standard for privacy and the media under European human rights law. In essence, the Court discussed the public-interest value of a disputed article published in the magazine Paris Match, revealing aspects of the private life of a public person exercising an important political function. This blog focusses in particular on women’s right to tell the story of a relationship as a matter of personal identity. Continue reading
The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog
Month: November 2015 (Page 3 of 4)
This is one of a series of posts about the pending EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and its consequences for intermediaries and user speech online. In an earlier introduction and FAQ, I discussed the GDPR’s impact on both data protection law and Internet intermediary liability law. Developments culminating in the GDPR have put these two very different fields on a collision course – but they lack a common vocabulary and are in many cases animated by different goals. Laws addressing concerns in either field without consideration for the concerns of the other can do real harm to users’ rights to privacy, freedom of expression, and freedom to access information online. Continue reading
On 27 October 2015 Mr Justice Blue, sitting at first instance in the Supreme Court of South Australia, handed down judgment on liability in the defamation case of Duffy v Google Inc ([2015] SASC 170). He held Google Inc liable for the defamatory content of the hyperlinks and snippets returned by way of Google search results on the Claimant’s name and for the defamatory content of search autocompletes relating to her. Perhaps more controversially, Google was also held liable as a republisher of the defamatory content of third party websites hyperlinked on its search results. Continue reading
This is one of a series of posts about the pending EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and its consequences for intermediaries and user speech online. In an earlier introduction and FAQ, I discussed the GDPR’s impact on both data protection law and Internet intermediary liability law. Developments culminating in the GDPR have put these two very different fields on a collision course — but they lack a common vocabulary and are in many cases animated by different goals. Laws addressing concerns in either field without consideration for the concerns of the other can do real harm to users’ rights to privacy, freedom of expression, and freedom to access information online. Continue reading
The key players in the debate about the BBC Charter have now shown their hands. The public’s voice is being filtered through a range of public consultations by Parliament, by Government and by the BBC Trust. Continue reading
The Information Commissioner’s office has, since May 2014, dealt with 441 cases and has required Google to de-list in 20%. It has, over this period, issued one enforcement notice against Google. Continue reading
In the case of Richardson v Facebook ([2015] EWHC 3154 (QB)) an action in defamation and under the right to privacy against Facebook has been dismissed in the High Court. The Facebook entity named as defendant did not “control” the publication so as to allow liability; and even if it did, no claim under the Human Rights Act could lie against Facebook as it could not be described as any sort of a public authority for the purposes of Section 6 of the Act. Continue reading
The most important news story of the week in the area of media and information law was the release of the Government’s 299 page draft Investigatory Powers Bill [pdf] and 222 pages of accompanying documents. Continue reading
Following months of uncertainty and a few weeks of intense speculation and spin, the UK government has published its draft Investigatory Powers bill, a piece of legislation incorporating sweeping surveillance powers frequently described and derided as a “snooper’s charter”. Continue reading
This post examines an opinion the Supreme Court of New Hampshire recently issued in a civil case: McCarthy v. Manchester Police Department, 2015 WL 5559880 (2015). As usual, the court begins the opinion by explaining how, and why, the lawsuit arose. Continue reading
Recent Judgments
© 2026 Inforrm's Blog
Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑