Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis article examines the effect that cultural and technological changes have had on interpersonal communication and aims to provide an interdisciplinary explanation for the recent proliferation of defamation in electronic media. The authors argue that the absence of certain extra-linguistic cues and established cultural convention in the electronic environment often results in miscommunication which — if not itself defamatory — gives rise to emotional exchanges between interlocutors in a manner that provokes defamation. The authors begin their analysis with a discussion of defamation law as a recipient-oriented tort, demonstrating the importance of the context of communication in the determination of whether a particular remark carries a defamatory sense. In order to better understand how an online communication is received and understood by its recipients, the authors then investigate three differences between electronic and other media of communications: i) that the technology-mediated and text-bases character of electronic communication makes the process of communication more difficult and the incidence of miscommunication more likely; ii) that the nature of social interaction in the online setting has a tendency to increase hostile communications that might be considered defamatory; iii) that the cultural context and standards of communication that develop in online communities will reduce the significance of these hostile communications. Applying these considerations to the law of defamation, the authors conclude by rejecting the naive point of view that a libel published through the Internet ought to be dealt with in exactly the same way that a libel published in a newspaper is dealt with. The authors end by calling for further empirical research about the content that is produced as a consequence of contextual challenges in electronic communication.

Judicial and constitutional conservatism have allowed Irish defamation law to remain remarkably close to its English common law origins. But the common law of defamation was not designed for a modem democracy with a free press, and Ireland's libel laws have a profound effect upon freedom of expression. If Ireland is to be a modern democracy, as its constitution asserts that it is, and the European Convention on Human Rights demands, it must protect a core area of free expression in order to allow the press (without the fear of repercussion) to keep the public informed about matters of concern. Once this minimum degree of freedom of expression is attained, Irish courts can begin to weigh other interests, including the right to one's good name, against free speech interests. Reforming Irish defamation law is therefore essential to Ireland's status as a democracy. It is also required by Ireland's constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression. Ireland's Supreme Court should review current defamatory law and impose necessary reforms in order to render it constitutional. Part II of this Note will examine Irish constitutional history, with attention to the conservative, traditionally often English, influences that have led to Ireland's avoidance of an American-style constitutional review. In Part III, this Note will describe the current Irish defamation law accompanied by an analysis of the Irish decision, Campbell-Sharp v. Independent Newspapers (IRE), Ltd. This section will also survey the impact of defamation law on freedom of expression. Part IV will discuss the level of freedom of expression required by the Irish Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights and propose reforms to the law of defamation. Part V will conclude with some final comments.

International integration today includes not only a political but also a legal aspect. With the help of various supranational tools, such as international commercial arbitration, international treaties and agreements, various organizations, including those formed on the basis of such agreements, global trends of law are formed. The convergence of legal systems is the key to the harmonious development of civil (private) relations. Defamation law is no exception. In order to better protect private life and freedom of speech, it is necessary to study carefully both the law prevailing in certain foreign countries and the practice of supranational structures. The European Court of Human Rights holds a special place among such structures. In its decisions, it introduced the most advanced legal constructions of protection against defamation, which are seen in American and German law. These structures are referred to as standards or principles of law enforcement developed by the European Court of Human Rights. The standards of the European Court of Human Rights are applied in all countries that are parties to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms dated 04.11.1950. To fully protect the rights of its citizens the Russian Federation should also not stand aside from the European Court of Human Rights positions. ; Международная интеграция включает в себя сегодня не только политический, но и правовой аспект. С помощью различных наднациональных инструментов, таких как международные коммерческие арбитражи, международные договоры и соглашения, различного рода организации, в том числе образованные на основании таких договоров, формируются мировые тенденции права. Сближение правовых систем является ключом к гармоничному развитию гражданских (частных) отношений. Диффамационное право не исключение. Для более эффективной защиты частной жизни и свободы слова необходимо тщательное изучение как права, сложившегося в отдельных зарубежных странах, так и практики наднациональных структур. Особое место среди таких структур занимает Европейский суд по правам человека. В свои решениях он внедрил самые современные юридические конструкции защиты от диффамации, которые сформировались в американском и немецком праве. Указанные конструкции именуются стандартами, или принципами правоприменения, разработанными Европейским судом по правам человека. Стандарты Европейского суда по правам человека применяются во всех странах, являющихся участниками Конвенция о защите прав человека и основных свобод от 04 ноября 1950 г. Российская Федерация для полноценной защиты прав своих граждан также не должна оставаться в стороне от сформированных Европейским судом по правам человека позиций.

Comparative legal analysis of the civil-law protection of honor, dignity and business reputation is conducted on the base of the views of the scientists of Uzbekistan and Japan and civil legislation of two countries and as a result, this analysis provides proposals and inferences on improvement of the acting national legislation.

Comparative legal analysis of the civil-law protection of honor, dignity and business reputation is conducted on the base of the views of the scientists of Uzbekistan and Japan and civil legislation of two countries and as a result, this analysis provides proposals and inferences on improvement of the acting national legislation.