A B.C. court has ruled that linking to allegedly defamatory content does not amount to a republication of the content. The case arises from one of the Crookes lawsuits, this one involving both Wikipedia and P2PNet.net [full disclosure: Crookes is suing me with similar claims that include linking to websites that in turn link to allegedly defamatory content]. The court cautioned that a link could conceivably raise defamation claims, but that this would occur where the party posting the link added additional commentary about the underlying link. In the case of nothing more than a link, the court concluded that:
Although a hyperlink provides immediate access to material published on another website, this does not amount to republication of the content on the originating site. This is especially so as a reader may or may not follow the
More discussion on the case at P2Pnet.net.
Dan Burnett, the lawyer for p2pnet has done an interview, explaining why the case matters for the future of the net. He says that there is a chance of an appeal against the judge’s ruling: http://www.newslab.ca/?p=114
Yeah, seems Crookes appealed all cases.
Pretty sure the Lamprey starred in â€œDream Catcherâ€ http://rapid4me.com/?q=Dream+Catcher .
But until now I had been calling them shit weasels.