England: You Can Read Our Story About Rebekah Brooks And The Murdochs

38.18K

J.K. Trotter

07/09/15 04:15PM

Filed to: announcements

The following replies are approved. To see additional replies that are pending approval, click Show Pending. Warning: These may contain graphic material.

NewYorkCynic J.K. Trotter 07/09/15 04:22PM

Out of curiosity, why is it Gawker’s responsibility to follow English law? If this is a stupid question, I apologize.

Velvetine NewYorkCynic 07/09/15 04:25PM

If something is published in England, then the publisher can be sued for libel there. It’s called libel tourism, where litigants choose a juristiction which favours them. English law puts the onus on the defendants to disprove libel. Often, simply not publishing a story is easier than facing legal costs against a complainant with deep pockets.

Pup1213 NewYorkCynic 07/09/15 04:31PM

It’s contempt of court even if it’s published somewhere else. Essentially it is saying it brings the court into disrepute if it involves a trial or someone uses a super injunction

NewYorkCynic Velvetine 07/09/15 04:31PM

So the fact that it was being accessed by computers with English IP addresses would mean that it was published in England, and therefore would be subject to English laws, regardless of the fact that the article was not actually physically published in England?

Cherith Cutestory NewYorkCynic 07/09/15 04:35PM

Yes. Or at least potentially. It would take an expensive suit to argue otherwise. Which is why these laws have become a major problem.

Harbour Seal J.K. Trotter 07/09/15 05:09PM

ENGLAND IS NOT THE UK THE UK IS FOUR COUNTRIES HOW MANY FUCKING TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY THIS JESUS FUCKING CHRIST ITS LIKE CALLING ALL AMERICANS CALIFORNIANS BECAUSE THATS THE MOST POPULOUS STATE