Volume II

Issue : 7: April 1, 2004

• Philippines Government to Benefit from Online Gambling
• World Trade Organization Rules that the U.S. Should be Opened to Internet Gambling
• Accountant Sues Search Engines for Libel for "Injurious" Search Results
• Court Finds New York Times Liable for Defamation for Use of Companys Graphic in Article
• Japanese Court Finds No Copyright Exists in Web News Headlines
• European Union Hits Microsoft with Record $613 Million Fine for Antitrust Abuses
• B.C. Supreme Court Finds Potential Liability for Chat Room Owners over Postings
• German Court Rules Pop-Up Ads Require Permission
• The Dutch Supreme Court Rules ISP can Ban Spammers
• Privacy Commissioner of Canada Releases New Decisions
• California Appeals Court Finds Personal Jurisdiction over Two Out-of-State Businesses
• Canadian Federal Court Dismisses Motion to Compel ISP to Disclose Identity of File Sharers

Home > Volume II > Issue 7: April 1, 2004 > B.C. Supreme Court Finds Potential Liability for Chat Room Owners over Postings

B.C. Supreme Court Finds Potential Liability for Chat Room Owners over Postings

The Supreme Court of British Columbia found in a recent decision that an owner of a chat room may be held liable for defamatory postings if the owner is aware of such postings and fails to take reasonable steps to prevent their publication. The defendant and owner of the chat room, the B.C. Federation of Foster Parents Association, was found not liable because the Federation acted reasonably once it discovered that there were defamatory postings on its chat room. The Federation instructed its service provider to remove the defamatory statements upon being informed of their existence. When it was discovered the statements were not removed, the owner instructed the service provider to shut the chat room down. While the chat room was not closed immediately upon instruction from the owner, it was closed eventually.

In addition, the plaintiff Carter attacked the Federation because it made reference to the chat room in its newsletter. The Court ruled that the reference in the newsletter did not constitute publication of the defamatory postings on the chat room. Carter's claim was also dismissed because it was brought out of time of the limitation period. The Court rejected the plaintiff's argument that the statements were republished every time a person accessed the chat room, since this would result in no limitation period being applicable to defamatory statements made in chat rooms. Rather, the Court found the limitation period starts once a person is aware of the defamatory statements.

For a copy of the decision, visit:
www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/sc/04/01/2004bcsc0137.htm
For more information, visit:
www.cle.bc.ca/CLE/Stay+Current/Collection/2004/3/04-bcsc-carter.htm