虚假庇护所:评估诽谤旅游辩论的新进展

Q2 Social Sciences Journal of Media Law Pub Date : 2019-01-02 DOI:10.1080/17577632.2019.1679425
John A. Larkin
{"title":"虚假庇护所:评估诽谤旅游辩论的新进展","authors":"John A. Larkin","doi":"10.1080/17577632.2019.1679425","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Libel tourism is the phenomenon whereby litigants issue libel claims in inappropriate fora in order to avail themselves of the pro-claimant laws therein. For years, London held the reputation as the global capital for libel tourism. However, following controversy in this area in the 2000s and passage of both the US SPEECH Act and Defamation Act 2013, the debate surrounding the libel tourism has taken several new directions. Many commentators now wonder whether libel tourists, deprived of a haven in London, will flock to fora with more pro-claimant regimes. Others go further, suggesting that libel tourism has the potential to flare up once more in England and that the 2013 Act leaves the door open to libel tourists. Some scholars have even asserted that such is the danger, an international convention must be established to ensure that the blight of libel tourism is finally slain. This article investigates how realistic and desirable these new developments in the debate are.","PeriodicalId":37779,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Media Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17577632.2019.1679425","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"False havens: assessing new developments in the libel tourism debate\",\"authors\":\"John A. Larkin\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17577632.2019.1679425\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Libel tourism is the phenomenon whereby litigants issue libel claims in inappropriate fora in order to avail themselves of the pro-claimant laws therein. For years, London held the reputation as the global capital for libel tourism. However, following controversy in this area in the 2000s and passage of both the US SPEECH Act and Defamation Act 2013, the debate surrounding the libel tourism has taken several new directions. Many commentators now wonder whether libel tourists, deprived of a haven in London, will flock to fora with more pro-claimant regimes. Others go further, suggesting that libel tourism has the potential to flare up once more in England and that the 2013 Act leaves the door open to libel tourists. Some scholars have even asserted that such is the danger, an international convention must be established to ensure that the blight of libel tourism is finally slain. This article investigates how realistic and desirable these new developments in the debate are.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37779,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Media Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17577632.2019.1679425\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Media Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2019.1679425\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Media Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2019.1679425","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

诽谤旅游是指诉讼当事人在不适当的场合提出诽谤索赔,以利用其中支持索赔人的法律的现象。多年来,伦敦一直被誉为全球诽谤旅游之都。然而,在21世纪初这一领域的争议以及2013年《美国演讲法》和《诽谤法》的通过之后,围绕诽谤旅游的辩论出现了几个新的方向。许多评论家现在想知道,被剥夺了伦敦避风港的诽谤游客是否会涌向更有利于索赔制度的论坛。其他人则更进一步,认为诽谤旅游有可能在英格兰再次爆发,2013年的法案为诽谤游客敞开了大门。一些学者甚至断言,这就是危险所在,必须制定一项国际公约,以确保诽谤旅游业的破坏最终被扼杀。本文探讨了辩论中的这些新发展是多么现实和可取。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
False havens: assessing new developments in the libel tourism debate
ABSTRACT Libel tourism is the phenomenon whereby litigants issue libel claims in inappropriate fora in order to avail themselves of the pro-claimant laws therein. For years, London held the reputation as the global capital for libel tourism. However, following controversy in this area in the 2000s and passage of both the US SPEECH Act and Defamation Act 2013, the debate surrounding the libel tourism has taken several new directions. Many commentators now wonder whether libel tourists, deprived of a haven in London, will flock to fora with more pro-claimant regimes. Others go further, suggesting that libel tourism has the potential to flare up once more in England and that the 2013 Act leaves the door open to libel tourists. Some scholars have even asserted that such is the danger, an international convention must be established to ensure that the blight of libel tourism is finally slain. This article investigates how realistic and desirable these new developments in the debate are.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Media Law
Journal of Media Law Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: The only platform for focused, rigorous analysis of global developments in media law, this peer-reviewed journal, launched in Summer 2009, is: essential for teaching and research, essential for practice, essential for policy-making. It turns the spotlight on all those aspects of law which impinge on and shape modern media practices - from regulation and ownership, to libel law and constitutional aspects of broadcasting such as free speech and privacy, obscenity laws, copyright, piracy, and other aspects of IT law. The result is the first journal to take a serious view of law through the lens. The first issues feature articles on a wide range of topics such as: Developments in Defamation · Balancing Freedom of Expression and Privacy in the European Court of Human Rights · The Future of Public Television · Cameras in the Courtroom - Media Access to Classified Documents · Advertising Revenue v Editorial Independence · Gordon Ramsay: Obscenity Regulation Pioneer?
期刊最新文献
The Bypass Strategy: platforms, the Online Safety Act and future of online speech Freedom of expression after disinformation: Towards a new paradigm for the right to receive information The Digital Services Act’s red line: what the Commission can and cannot do about disinformation The regulation of disinformation: a critical appraisal The EU policy on disinformation: aims and legal basis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1