Blogs Enter Courts, Begin Losing

The word "blog" may have been the word of the year in 2004, but 2006 has been the year it was officially recorded in court records. January saw the first successful libel suit against a blogger, and September saw an $11 million defamation judgment against a forum poster.

Case A, just because we can: Though Louisianan Carey Bock could not afford legal counsel in the wake of the Hurricane Katrina (she was after all homeless at the time action was taken), and thus didn't appear in court to defend herself, that didn't stop a Florida jury from making an $11 million example of her. After becoming dissatisfied with the services of Sue Scheff, Bock called her a crook, a con artist and a fraud on an online message board that discussed the type of child services Scheff offered. Those four words cost Bock about $3 million a piece, a bill she can't pay - a bill Scheff and the jury knew she couldn't pay, just to send a message. running tally of Law in the Blogosphere. A Quick Guide To Not-as-free-as-you-thought-it-was Speech 1. So far, judges have 3. Yes, you can be held liable for libel through implication. You don't have to say it directly - even if it's a collection of true statements leading the reader (or listener) to a damaging conclusion. Judges, however, are reluctant to hear libel cases centering on true statements. 4. A podcast counts the same as print. Though slander is much harder to prove in court, audio is considered a recording, just like print, which turns slander in libel. 5. Though publishers are protected from third party comments when it comes to blogs, wikis, forums, et cetera, a medium like a podcast is different. Podcast guests are selected interviews, edited for content, and publishers are responsible for what their guests say. So make sure you research before publishing to either back up or refute a guest's remarks. Add to Del.icio.us | Digg | Yahoo! My Web | Furl Bookmark Murdok: