Defamation Bill

Debate between Lord Phillips of Sudbury and Lord May of Oxford

Tuesday 15th January 2013 Grand Committee

[Lord Lucas]

My Lords, speaking again as a web operator, I do not know any way of establishing a person’s identity just because they are posting. One could establish a web identity, but that may have a very fuzzy relationship with any individual. If someone posts, gives me an e-mail address and I verify that e-mail address, that is about as far as I can get. However, I think that we can reasonably insist on that. If we are offering website operators the protection of this Bill against being sued for what is posted on their sites, we can ask them at least to have verified a web identity. We can ask that they take some steps to have a method of communication with this person and do not just allow straightforward anonymous postings. Then, something put up on the net should come from someone with whom the website operator knows that they have an established means of communication. Whether or not that works, is fake or just ends in silence, I do not think you can ask the website operator to determine. But you can at least make them take the first step.

[Lord May of Oxford]

This is a sensitive and difficult issue but I find myself in agreement with the noble Lord, Lord Lester, and others that the downside of doing this outweighs the upside. However, it was also my impression—which may just reveal that I did not understand what was going on—that quite a significant recourse is already given by what we were discussing under Clause 5.

[Lord Phillips of Sudbury]

Not if the complainant does not know the name of the author of the posting.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord May of Oxford]

I apologise. I forget the curious thing that you must stand up, thus rendering the microphone less effective. Be that as it may, I thought that there was some recourse and a real encouragement to the person running the thing not to permit really bad behaviour, because there is that recourse against the person who owns the website.

[Lord Phillips of Sudbury]

With respect, there is no recourse against the person who runs the website if they take the posting down. However, by that time, the damage to the complainant will have been done and will have reverberated around the world—and there will be no redress.

[Lord May of Oxford]

Did I misunderstand the part of Clause 5 that said there was a responsibility on the owner of the website not to permit outrages of the kind that the noble Lord just referred to? If there is, can you not sue?

[Lord Phillips of Sudbury]

I am afraid that the noble Lord did misunderstand.

Defamation Bill

Debate between Lord Phillips of Sudbury and Lord May of Oxford

Wednesday 19th December 2012 Grand Committee

[Lord May of Oxford]

I suspect that I am the only non-lawyer around the table but I wish to express my enthusiasm for the amendment.

[Lord Phillips of Sudbury]

My Lords, I should be interested whether the Minister who is to sum up can tell the Committee whether there has previously been a conspiracy of judges frustrated in the manner that we have seen today.