Date of this Version
July 2003
Document Type
Journal Article
Abstract
The High Court decision in the landmark Dow Jones v. Gutnick defamation case in December 2002 was eagerly anticipated. The unanimous decision that defamation occurs where Internet material is downloaded rather than where it is uploaded angered media proprietors and free speech advocates who predicted publishers would have to work to the lowest common denominator of the most restrictive laws throughout the world if they were to avoid litigation. This article revisits the decision and finds the post-Gutnick publishing environment may not be as confusing or as restrictive as first made out. It argues that, despite the financial and intellectual investment in the appeal, any other result was improbable. The decision will serve as a useful teaching tool and as a warning to publishers to treat their Internet products as separate entities.
DownloadThis document has been peer reviewed.
Publication Details
Pearson, Mark, Proud, Carolyn, and Willcox, Peter. (2003). The cyberboundaries of reputation: implications of the Australian High Court’s Gutnick decision for journalists. Australian Journalism Review. v. 25, no. 1, pp. 101-114.
Copyright © Journalism Education Association 2004. All Rights Reserved.
Permission granted.
The Australian Journalism Review is published by the Journalism Education Association .