Cyberlibel
Cyberlibel, also known as cyber defamation or online defamation, refers to the act of making false and damaging statements about an individual or entity on the Internet. These statements can appear on various platforms, including blogs, social media, and website comment sections, often shared anonymously, which can complicate legal proceedings. Much like traditional libel, which involves written defamatory statements in print media, cyberlibel requires the establishment of specific criteria to pursue a legal case. This includes proving the falsity of the statement, publication to a third party, and demonstrating that the publisher acted with negligence.
One of the significant challenges in cyberlibel cases is the anonymity of the internet users who make defamatory comments, which can hinder the identification and legal action against them. Additionally, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects Internet Service Providers and website hosts from being held liable for user-generated content. For public figures, the burden of proof is even higher, as they must demonstrate that the defamatory statement was made with actual malice. Despite these challenges, there have been successful cyberlibel lawsuits, highlighting the growing need for users to recognize the potential consequences of their online statements. As the Internet continues to expand, cases of cyberlibel are increasing, prompting ongoing discussions about the balance between free speech and responsible online communication.
On this Page
Cyberlibel
Cyberlibel, also known as cyber defamation or online defamation, involves defamatory statements made against a person or entity that are posted on the Internet. These statements might be posted in a blog, in the comments section of a website, or on social media sites such as Facebook or X (formerly Twitter). In many cases, a person posts the defamatory statements anonymously. Because the Internet has such a far reach, negative statements made online can spread quickly, potentially damaging a person’s reputation or affecting a business’s public image.
What Is Libel?
Cyberlibel is similar to traditional libel in many ways. In traditional law, libel is defamation that is written and published. This usually includes negative statements that appear in books, newspapers, magazines, or other written texts. Because communication on the Internet is largely conducted through the written word and published digitally, online defamation is considered a form of libel.
To build a libel case, there are certain criteria that must be met. According to an article posted on the American Bar Association’s website, the first element is a false and defamatory statement made about a person or business. This statement must also be an unprivileged publication to a third party. In this case, "unprivileged" means that the speech was not protected. For instance, statements made by a witness during a deposition or a trial are privileged. Such statements cannot be used to build a defamation case, even if the statements are proven false. The second part of this element involves publication of the defamatory statement to a third party. This means that someone other than the person whom the statement is about viewed or heard the statement. Additionally, a plaintiff, the person suing for libel, needs to show fault on the part of the publisher, the person or entity who made the statement, that at least amounts to negligence. Finally, the plaintiff must show that the statement was damaging in some respect in order to build a libel case against the publisher. These elements must be present in a cyberlibel case as well.
Things are slightly more complicated if the plaintiff is a public figure. In order to bring a libel case, the public figure must somehow prove that the statement was made with actual malice. In legal terms, actual malice means that the person who made the defamatory statement knew that it was not true or had willfully disregarded the truth of the statement and published it anyway.
Challenges of Cyberlibel
While traditional libel is straightforward, cyberlibel can be difficult to prove. One of the main challenges is that defamatory statements are often posted online anonymously. Additionally, a plaintiff cannot sue an Internet service provider (ISP) and website hosts for statements made by an Internet user. This is stipulated by section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) passed by Congress in 1996. The CDA states that "[n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider." However, a plaintiff can file a so-called "John Doe" lawsuit against the anonymous publisher. In some cases, the court will issue a subpoena to the ISP or website host that would compel the company to reveal the identity of the person making the libelous statements.
Another difficulty in building a cyberlibel case is trying to prove that a statement is not merely a person’s opinion but a statement of alleged fact. A person’s opinion is protected from legal action. Yet, not all statements that are worded as opinions are protected speech. Some statements that begin with "I think" or "I believe" can still be considered statements of alleged fact depending on the circumstances of the case and the statements made. For example, imagine that someone posts the message on social media, "I think Acme Shoes purposefully sells used shoes marked as new in an effort to try to trick its customers." If the statement is proven false, the publisher of the statement may not be protected simply because the statement started with "I think." If the company can show that the statement was damaging because others believed that it was factual, then the company may be able to sue for cyberlibel. Like traditional libel lawsuits, cyberlibel lawsuits can be costly, and there is no guarantee that the injured party will receive monetary damages. In some cases, the plaintiff may be able to sue at least to get the defamatory statement removed from the Internet.
However, some people have successfully sued for cyber defamation and won. In 2003, Sue Scheff, a children’s services referral provider, sued Carey Bock for posting messages calling Scheff a "con artist" on a site for parents with children in boarding schools. Three years later, a jury awarded Scheff $11.3 million in damages, one of the largest sums awarded in a cyberlibel case to date.
In some instances, accusations of cyberlibel have been made against the media, and journalists worry this could become a slippery slope where the media is not able to report the truth without being sued. Such was the case in the Philippians with a case against journalists Maria Ressa and Rey Santos, who were sued for cyberlibel for reporting on a judge taking bribes. The court convicted Ressa, while around the world organizations such as Amnesty International and the Committee to Protect Journalists and Reporters Without Borders protested the conviction, arguing it punished the journalists for reporting the truth.
Cyberlibel cases continue to grow as the Internet becomes more pervasive. The Independent noted that cases of cyberlibel in the United Kingdom rose by more than 300 percent from 2013 to 2014. Legal experts contend that the increase in such cases stems from a lack of understanding among Internet users about the difference between personal opinions and defamation. Still, most experts agree that Internet users need to understand that they are responsible for what they post online, and they must be willing to accept the consequences for the statements they make.
Bibliography
Berg, David. "Social Media and Online Defamation." NOLO, www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/social-media-online-defamation.html. Accessed 28 Jan. 2025.
Burrell, Ian. "Libel Cases Prompted by Social Media Posts Rise 300% in a Year." The Independent, 19 Oct. 2014, www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/libel-cases-prompted-by-social-media-posts-rise-300-in-a-year-9805004.html. Accessed 28 Jan. 2025.
"Cyber Torts—Online Defamation." Business Law Today: Text & Cases E-Commerce, Legal, Ethical, and Global Environment, Comprehensive. Roger LeRoy Miller and Gaylord A. Jentz. 9th ed. Mason: South-Western, 2012. 108–09. Print.
"Handling Business Defamation: A Guide to Protecting Your Company's Reputation." Davis Business Law, 11 Jan. 2024, davisbusinesslaw.com/handling-business-defamation-a-guide-to-protecting-your-companys-reputation/. Accessed 28 Jan. 2025.
Mahatole, Siddhi. "Watchdogs Appeal to Philippine Court to Drop Case Against Maria Ressa." VOA News, 24 June 2024, www.voanews.com/a/watchdogs-appeal-to-philippine-court-to-drop-case-against-maria-ressa/7668413.html. Accessed 28 Jan. 2025.
"Millions Awarded in Internet Defamation Case." NBCNews.com, 11 Oct. 2006, www.nbcnews.com/id/15226738/ns/technology‗and‗science-tech‗and‗gadgets/t/millions-awarded-internet-defamation-case/#.Vtm0Nubl9pB. Accessed 28 Jan. 2025.
Scheff, Sue. "The Cost of Internet Defamation." Huffington Post, 5 Mar. 2014, www.huffingtonpost.com/sue-scheff/the-cost-of-internet-defamation‗b‗4906508.html. Accessed 28 Jan. 2025.