• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About
  • Services
  • Contact
  • Reviews

California Defamation Law Blog

  • Home
  • About
  • Blogs
  • Archive Page
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Services
  • Contact Us
  • (626) 793-8607
You are here: Home / Articles / Decriminalizing Defamation: Part II

Decriminalizing Defamation: Part II

December 27, 2008 by Adrianos Facchetti 1 Comment

In my last post I covered just a few examples of the recent "trend" of treating defamation as a crime.  

As you might expect, defamation is considered to be a crime in many Asian and Middle Eastern countries. It is also a crime in some European countries, like Italy, for example.  What is surprising is that in some states in the U.S. defamation may be treated as a crime, albeit rarely.  But recently a Colorado man was criminally charged with defamation over statements he allegedly made about his former lover on Craigslist.  So this got me to thinking . . . why is this happening?

The reason is simple.  It's the Internet, stupid.  

More and more people are using the Internet to conduct business and share ideas and information than ever before. The Internet allows people to discuss, and some cases, gripe about topics they would never dare speak about in public.  It leads people to mistakenly believe that (1) they are truly anonymous on the web, and (2) that the Internet deserves additional protection under the First Amendment over other medium of expression.  This view of the Internet encourages stupid behavior, or defamation.  

And courts haven't helped the situation very much, either.  Until very recently, they have consistently interpreted laws in such a way that is overly protective of speech.  Don't think that's possible?  Wait until your business is defamed and you can't do anything about it and you'll understand.  

Without an adequate civil remedy to right a wrong, people will get creative.  Some people will hire an expert in SEO and engage in black hat tactics, while others, like prosecutors, will charge a person with a crime.  Who knows?  Perhaps people will engage in self-help (read violence) to address defamation on the net.  

The point is:  if we do not provide a meaningful way to address alleged instances of defamation on the Internet in a civil context, prosecutors and others will find a way.

What are your thoughts on the matter?  Should defamation be treated as a criminal offense and/or a civil remedy? Should governments regulate the Internet?  How so?  If not, why not?

If you enjoyed this post half as much as I enjoyed writing it, please subscribe by e-mail or RSS to receive my future posts.

Buffer Share

Filed Under: Articles

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. KT says

    May 16, 2010 at 9:06 pm

    Defamation can cause the defamed complete and permanent misery. Some people understand this fact very well and practice defamation. Defamation should be considered a very serious crime everywhere. There should be a world wide harmonized law that severly punishes those who harm another with defamation.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to KT Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Primary Sidebar

Some Featured

How to determine which costs are allowable in connection with an anti-SLAPP motion

Should a court consider a plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees in determining how much to award in fees for the defendant following a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

May a trial court consider a defendant’s “walk away” offer when determining the reasonableness of fees following a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

Recent Posts

Does a claim for intentional physical distress exist under California law?

Does California’s anti-SLAPP statute apply in bankruptcy court?

Must attorney-client confidences be revealed in order to obtain attorney’s fees after a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

Follow Us On

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

Search

Footer

California Defamation Law Blog

Law Offices of Adrianos Facchetti 4444 W. Riverside Drive, Suite 308, Burbank, CA 91505
California Defamation Lawyer & Attorney of Adrianos Facchetti Law Firm, offering services related to libel, internet defamation, slander, defamation of character, disparagement, anti-SLAPP, personal injury, car accidents, motorcycle accidents, trucking accidents, serving Los Angeles, San Fernando Valley, San Gabriel Valley, Pasadena, Burbank, Glendale, Arcadia, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Long Beach, Orange County, Ventura County, San Bernardino, and throughout California.

Recent Posts

  • How to determine which costs are allowable in connection with an anti-SLAPP motion July 18, 2022
  • Should a court consider a plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees in determining how much to award in fees for the defendant following a successful anti-SLAPP motion? June 28, 2022
  • May a trial court consider a defendant’s “walk away” offer when determining the reasonableness of fees following a successful anti-SLAPP motion? June 24, 2022
  • Does a claim for intentional physical distress exist under California law? June 20, 2022

Copyright © 2025 · Magazine Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in