p2pnet - rss feed: SLAPPING Freedom of Speech
p2pnet news | freedom:- “Typically, SLAPPs take the form of defamation actions brought by large corporate actors to shut down criticism by non-governmental organizations or local citizens,” posts Michel-Adrien Sheppard on his Library Boy blog.
SLAPP is shorthand for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation
“The actions are for huge sums of money and are often seen by critics as really just attempts to bankrupt opponents or intimidate them,” he says.
They’re not always used to get cash, however. They’re also great weapons for hammering off- and online entities which have in some way incurred the wrath of powerful political and/or commercial interests.
I, for example, am currently being slapped by both. Or are they the same?
Wayne Crookes, in British Columbia, Canada, is suing not only me but also Google, Yahoo and the Wikipedia, not to mention other large commercial interests, as well as a number of ordinary people with zero resources, for defamation.
And Nikki Hemming, the woman who runs Sharman Networks’ severely discredited Kazaa P2P file sharing application, is also suing me for defamation. At one point, Sharman networks, based in Australia, was suing me as well, but it dropped out, leaving Hemming to carry the Kazaa flag by herself.
They, too, are typical slapp cases.
Says Sheppard on Library Boy:
On August 20, 2006, I published a post entitled Quebec Environmental Pioneers Threatened With Being SLAPPed Into Oblivion. It described how one of Quebec’s oldest environmental organizations, the Association québécoise de lutte contre la pollution atmosphérique (AQLPA) was facing imminent extinction because of a multi-million dollar lawsuit from a scrap metal operator. AQLPA was instrumental in the Mulroney-Reagan years in getting anti-acid rain programs implemented by the Canadian and American governments:
“In a front page article on Friday, August 18, 2006, the Montreal daily Le Devoir reported AQLPA’s insurance company informed the association that its contract protecting it against defamation (director and officer liability coverage) has been retroactively cancelled to a point in time predating the launch of the defamation suit. AQLPA’s attempts to find another insurer have all been turned down, according to the newspaper”.
The post also described the legislative situation elsewhere in Canada, in the United States and in Australia, he says, continuing:
As I further reported on October 9, 2006 in the post Quebec Government Launches Study On Anti-Activist Defamation Suits, a government panel was set up to look at the balance between freedom of expression and the right to one’s reputation.
The panel, led by Roderick A. Macdonald, the F.R. Scott Professor of Constitutional and Public Law at McGill University, published its SLAPP report earlier this month. The document is only in French.
Here is what it contains.
It comes out very strongly against the potentially “abusive” nature of SLAPPs and calls on the provincial government to adopt measures to discourage them as they “aim essentially at forcing these individuals or these organizations to limit their public activity, or again, to self-censor their declarations by involving them in costly judicial proceedings they can generally not afford. It is basically a form of judicial intimidation” (Prologue, p. 1).
The report explains that 25 U.S. states have legislation regulating SLAPPs.
The panel suggests 3 possible avenues for government action:
- anti-SLAPP legislation
- amendments to Quebec’s Code of Civil Procedure to more strictly control “abusive” defamation suits
- legislation enshrining protection for public participation
The government will hold public hearings into the matter in the fall.
More from:
* Quebec moves to rein in legal bullying, Montreal Gazette, July 19, 2007: “They [report authors] note that Section 46 of the Code of Civil Procedure gives judges the power to throw out nuisance lawsuits. They suggest this section and related sections would have to be beefed up to spell out the right for a judge to reject a SLAPP. But they also suggest a more sweeping approach: adopting a law called the Anti-SLAPP Act. This law would include the changes in the Code of Civil Procedure and an amendment to Quebec’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms that recognizes the right to public participation, and the principle of immunity from prosecution that would accompany this new right. The authors also propose creation of a special fund to finance court fights by not-for-profit advocacy groups facing SLAPPs.”
* SLAPP- une lois s’impose, dit le comité d’experts (SLAPP - a law is needed says the expert committee), Le Devoir, July 18, 2007: “On évoque que le recours aux SLAPP est un «phénomène réel» qui soulève des «enjeux sociaux importants» et qui suscite au Québec «une réprobation» générale de la population. Il s’agit selon le comité d’une «menace» pour «la démocratie participative et d’un véritable risque de détournement des finalités de la justice». (The recourse to SLAPPs is described as a ‘real phenomenon’ that raises ‘important social questions’ and that provokes general ‘rejection’ from the population in Quebec. According to the committee, it is a real ‘threat’ to ‘participatory democracy and [presents] a true risk of hijacking the goals of justice’.)”
I hope Sheppard won’t mind me quoting him in full.
Meanwhile, any Canadian who has the slightest interest in freedom of expression should make a note of a Freedom of Speech CBC special slated to be aired tomorrow on The National at 10 pm EST.
Among others included in the lawsuit I mentioned earlier are my friends Mark Francis and Kate Holloway, and they were both interviewed for the programme.
Says Francis on Facebook:
This news story on The National covers political Internet freedoms of speech that you surely hold dear,but that are currently in peril.
A handful of current Canadian lawsuits currently pose an enormous threat to the Internet and politics in Canada, namely:
a) the enormous social and global potential of collaborative computing, social networking, and open source dialogue;
b) open and frank political speech in Canada, currently being “chilled” as truth disappears;
c) silencing, real and potential, of Internet whistleblowers, satirists, political humourists, anonymous sources and political dissidents;
d) the potential liability to anyone writing or hosting a blog or a wiki, for fear of legal and financial liability
Political correspondent Leslie Mackinnon interviews Professor of Internet Law Micheal Geist, seasoned blogger Mark Francis, and former Green Party-turned Liberal Party activist Kate Holloway about lawsuits currently opened against them from Wayne Crookes of BC.
Crookes is also currently suing Wikipedia, Google, Yahoo, Myspace, and P2PNet and many more.
PLEASE watch this show to understand the issues better. PLEASE invite all you know on Facebook to this event. PLEASE go to cbc.ca/national and/or to libelchill.ca afterwards to comment and to share your thoughts and read the thoughts of others.
PLEASE take this issue seriously, and finally,
After you see the story, PLEASE go to libelchill.ca and donate to the Defense Fund, a legal fund for the Defendants, to make sure that the Champions of Online Truth can keep fighting for your right to Know, Share and Create online.
Jon Newton - p2pnet
(Thanks, Ilena)
Also See:
blog - Quebec Expert Panel Says Protect People Against Abusive Defamation Suits, July 22, 2007
Wayne Crookes - Wayne Crookes on slashdot, May 30, 2007
suing me for defamation - Free speech, libel and the internet age, July 31, 2006
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
