$125K award in email case
p2pnet.net News:- “People seem to think there is a level of anonymity to e-mail and the Internet. And that it’s a lawless area. And clearly it is not, nor should it be.”
The quote is attributed to a lawyer representing Canadian prehistoric archeologist Dr Cheryl Ross in a successful case against Huron Pat Holley who, in an email, accused Ross of “grave robbing“.
Awarding $125,000 in damages, “Clearly, the use of e-mail is far more powerful than the sending out of a multiple of hard-copy letters defaming the plaintiff,” said Justice Wailan Low of the Ontario Superior Court, quoted in a Globe & Mail story.
Ross’ lawyer, Berkley Sells, said the ruling set a precedent in the emerging field of Internet libel, “a notion that may eventually have a chilling effect on the freewheeling ways computer users send messages”.
The lawsuit said in October, 2003, Holley sent more than 30 people an e-mail slugged, “beware of . . . grave robber cheryl ross archeologist,” says the Globe & Mail. “It asserted that she ‘robbed’ human remains from his driveway, in conjunction with one of her supervisors at the university.”
Judge Low awarded the damages, “knowing it amounted to hitting Mr. Holley for all he was worth, or very close to it,” says the report, adding:
“In her decision, she said the damages amounted to ‘equivalent to all or a significant portion of the defendant’s assets.’
“Before this, there has been very little case law in the field of cyberlibel, although a June Ontario Court of Appeal decision was instructive. In that case, a homeless Vancouver man was ordered to pay $125,000 for libelling Barrick Gold Corp. in Internet postings.”
========================
See:-
grave robbing – Scientist awarded cyberlibel damages, Globe & Mail, November 13, 2004
November 15th, 2004 at 7:38 pm
I agree with the lawsuit, but isn’t sueing someone for everything they have a bit harsh? Even the evil music cartel doesn’t do that, unless your net worth amounts to $3K.
November 15th, 2004 at 7:51 pm
Hurray, its about time there was some jurisprudence in this area, reputations and lives can be destroyed by anonymous persons out to libel and slander, this decision is important. From emails to chat rooms, I do support freedom of expression, however a forum has opened for plain vicioiusness and destructiveness.
November 16th, 2004 at 4:40 am
What about Flaming on a message or chat board???? If you can’t take the heat stay out of the kitchen!!!! I think the ruling sucks!!!!!!!!!!!
November 15th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
I wish to say it is fair and finally justice prevails.