Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

High Court puts muzzle on Facebook trolls

By Nicole Murdoch - posted Thursday, 23 September 2021


In effect the Court's decision means the person owning that Facebook (or social media) page is legally liable for any comments posted to it. It's going to be a real test of our cyber and defamation laws.

Another key factor is that the defamation occurs at the time of posting, not just after notification to the page owner of comments posted to the owner's page.

So you could have a Facebook page and someone trolls it leaving defamatory remarks about someone and even though you may not yet know about these remarks, the defamation will be deemed to have occurred.

Advertisement

The courts have long held that a person can be defamed by the remarks posted by others on social media platforms such as Facebook.

Last year the issue made headlines when the Principal of Gold Coast Tamborine Mountain State High School won a defamation action against several parents for comments about her posted on social media.

The action, which was costly and spanned several years, did not involve media companies, but illustrates that the general public is not immune from defamation liability for rants on Facebook.

In its decision on the Voller matter, the High Court rejected the media companies' argument that, to be a publisher, an outlet must know of the relevant defamatory matter and intend to convey it.

The court found that, by creating a public Facebook page and posting content, the outlets facilitated, encouraged and thereby assisted the publication of comments from third-party Facebook users, and they were, therefore, publishers of those comments.

This decision now clears the way for Mr Voller's defamation action to proceed. The Court's decision did not relate to the defamation but focused on whether the media companies were liable for comment posted on their social media pages.

Advertisement

The decision will have wide reaching consequences for businesses, organisations, sports bodies and individuals with pages on social media.

Trolls and nasty keyboard abusers usually try to hide behind their anonymity in a flame war and use other people's pages to share their abuse. If the Court is making the page owner liable it's going to see tougher crackdowns and for media companies, more intensive and timely moderating of posts.

Individuals will also need to be doubly wary about who can post comments to their pages.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

10 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Nicole is an intellectual property and patent lawyer and principal at EAGLEGATE Lawyers in Brisbane.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Nicole Murdoch

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 10 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy