{"title":"ZXC中的隐私与诽谤:关于连贯性的一些担忧","authors":"J. Hariharan","doi":"10.1080/17577632.2022.2139569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This contribution considers the way that defamation law features in the Supreme Court's analysis of the misuse of private information tort in ZXC v Bloomberg LP. The court, it is argued, is markedly reluctant to accept that the operation of the privacy action is impacted by the law of defamation. Exploring the question of damages helps to show that this approach raises concerns about the law's coherence and could lead to significant difficulties in future cases.","PeriodicalId":37779,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Media Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Privacy and defamation in ZXC: some concerns about coherence\",\"authors\":\"J. Hariharan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17577632.2022.2139569\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This contribution considers the way that defamation law features in the Supreme Court's analysis of the misuse of private information tort in ZXC v Bloomberg LP. The court, it is argued, is markedly reluctant to accept that the operation of the privacy action is impacted by the law of defamation. Exploring the question of damages helps to show that this approach raises concerns about the law's coherence and could lead to significant difficulties in future cases.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37779,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Media Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Media Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2022.2139569\",\"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/10.1080/17577632.2022.2139569","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Privacy and defamation in ZXC: some concerns about coherence
ABSTRACT This contribution considers the way that defamation law features in the Supreme Court's analysis of the misuse of private information tort in ZXC v Bloomberg LP. The court, it is argued, is markedly reluctant to accept that the operation of the privacy action is impacted by the law of defamation. Exploring the question of damages helps to show that this approach raises concerns about the law's coherence and could lead to significant difficulties in future cases.
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?