Crookes v p2pnet: to appeal, or not to appeal?
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- Ex-Green Party of Canada campaign manager Wayne Crookes says he hasn’t decided if he’ll appeal a Supreme Court of BC decision which threw out his assertion that when p2pnet merely linked to a site he claims defames him, it was also publishing the alleged defamation.
Crookes, “alleged that Internet site p2pnet.net posted a link to U.S. sites openpolitics and usgovernetics that included defamatory statements,” says the Globe and Mail, today.
It quotes CIPPIC (Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic) director Philippa Lawson as pointing out the US has a law which provides immunity to ISPs, web site hosts and bloggers.
However, under Canadian law, they’re not protected from liability for what other people say on their sites or on other sites to which they link, she said.
“It’s been a big concern.”
Earlier, Lawson told me:
“This is a very important precedent for internet law in Canada, confirming that website operators are not responsible for defamatory content on other websites to which they have merely linked.
“It’s also big win for free speech and for the internet as we know it.”
Yesterday, “I went after people who libelled me,” Crookes informed the Globe and Mail’s Robert Matas:
He, “asked for an apology but did not receive what he considered to be adequate,” says the story, “So I commenced actions in the court,” he said, adding he’s not yet decided whether or not to appeal the ruling.
According to Dermod Travis, a ‘communication consultant’ who worked for the Green Party in 2004, and who’s now Crookes’ official spokesman, “People up until now have considered the Internet almost to be the wild west of journalism”.
Green Party national campaign manager
“Crookes became a public figure in 2004 as the national GPC Campaign Manager? in the Canadian federal election, 2004,” says Open Politics.
“After the election he remained the lead figure in the party’s management, as acting chair of the ERTC and chair of its successor, Management Committee. He remained in this role, and in the national campaign manager role, until he resigned immediately prior to the Canadian federal election, 2006.”
Until 2003, the Green Party, “had little capacity to organize itself between elections, and as late as 2000 the party had no persistent infrastructure, and was based out of the same office as the Green Party of Ontario,” p2pnet reported in April last year, quoting the Wikipedia.
“It [the Green Party] received substantial loans from Wayne Crookes, a BC businessman who had previously also made large donations to the Green Party of British Columbia,” said the Wikipedia article at the time, going on:
“Crookes has launched a lawsuit against Google, Wikipedia and the Canadian political blog site Openpolitics.ca for allowing supposedly libelous statements to be made about him.”
The above statements have since been deleted from the article, which now also avoids all mention of Crookes.
However, “Wayne Crookes is a businessman in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada,” says NationMaster, adding:
“He is best known for his involvement in the Green Party of British Columbia, to which he donated substantial funds in 2001, and the Green Party of Canada.”
Meanwhile, Crookes owns West Coast Title Search which, says the web site, “provides legal filing, information retrieval in over 200 government offices and process serving throughout Greater Vancouver, Victoria and New Westminster and by agents throughout the rest of BC”.
Definitely stay tuned.
Jon Newton- p2pnet
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.
November 1st, 2008 at 1:58 pm
This is a really important case for Canada but except for this G&M story, it has not been really covered by the lamescream media anywhere else, unless I have missed it
November 1st, 2008 at 2:04 pm
^^ What else is new?
Cheers!
November 2nd, 2008 at 11:20 am
An appeal makes no sense, except from the Crooke’s lawyer point of view. The lawyer will make more money from the appeal. The lawyer usually convince their customers to appeal, as if they could give unbiased opinions as to need to sue and then to appeal, one of the many quirks of the legal system…. money, money, money.
BTW, on my web site I have had many links. I have absolutely no control as to what is said on the linked sites after the link is set up. It is ridiculous that I could be sued by what is said on a linked site. It would also be ridiculous that I check on the truthfulness of what is said on external site. It is also ridiculous that I check if what is said about someone is about a public or non public figure, whatever that is. It is also ridiculous that I become knowledgeable as to what is and what is not defamation in the country where the link is created or the country of the linked page. Otherwise it could be the end of the internet as we know it.
Then, one of the problems with defamation is that it takes three experts (2 lawyers and a judge) to decide if defamation occurred. Then how in the world can ordinary people give opinions about anything if anything said may or may not be defamatory? Another of the many quirks of the legal system…. oppression, oppression, oppression.
November 2nd, 2008 at 1:10 pm
He is one of the reasons why I am not voting Green.