由诽谤性网络出版物引起的职业声誉辩护

Q. C. I. Freckelton
{"title":"由诽谤性网络出版物引起的职业声誉辩护","authors":"Q. C. I. Freckelton","doi":"10.4236/blr.2020.111024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article identifies the growing phenomenon of professionals suing their clients/patients for online defamation of their professional status and reputation. It reviews the phenomenon of ratings websites and scrutinises the growing popularity of such forms of feedback, identifying benefits but also detriments of such sites, especially when they are commercially influenced or unregulated. It notes that adverse feedback can be legitimate and helpful for both consumers and professionals but that it can also be the product of distress, anger and malice. This article reviews key court decisions in Germany, England, Canada and Australia where actions by disgruntled practitioners against clients/patients and/or publishing websites have succeeded in spite of the traditional diffidence on the part of professionals to engage in such litigation. It argues that the phenomena of defamation actions taken by professionals against their clients/patients and attempts to secure injunctive relief to prevent ongoing publication of false and reputation-damaging material are likely to grow in light of the potential for disinhibited and damaging publications by aggrieved persons on social media and other online forums.","PeriodicalId":300394,"journal":{"name":"Beijing Law Review","volume":"87 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Vindication of Professional Reputation Arising from Defamatory Online Publications\",\"authors\":\"Q. C. I. Freckelton\",\"doi\":\"10.4236/blr.2020.111024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article identifies the growing phenomenon of professionals suing their clients/patients for online defamation of their professional status and reputation. It reviews the phenomenon of ratings websites and scrutinises the growing popularity of such forms of feedback, identifying benefits but also detriments of such sites, especially when they are commercially influenced or unregulated. It notes that adverse feedback can be legitimate and helpful for both consumers and professionals but that it can also be the product of distress, anger and malice. This article reviews key court decisions in Germany, England, Canada and Australia where actions by disgruntled practitioners against clients/patients and/or publishing websites have succeeded in spite of the traditional diffidence on the part of professionals to engage in such litigation. It argues that the phenomena of defamation actions taken by professionals against their clients/patients and attempts to secure injunctive relief to prevent ongoing publication of false and reputation-damaging material are likely to grow in light of the potential for disinhibited and damaging publications by aggrieved persons on social media and other online forums.\",\"PeriodicalId\":300394,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Beijing Law Review\",\"volume\":\"87 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Beijing Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4236/blr.2020.111024\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Beijing Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/blr.2020.111024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章指出,越来越多的专业人士起诉他们的客户/病人在网上诽谤他们的专业地位和声誉。它回顾了对网站进行评级的现象,并仔细研究了这类反馈形式日益流行的情况,确定了这类网站的好处,但也指出了它们的坏处,尤其是在它们受到商业影响或不受监管的情况下。它指出,对消费者和专业人士来说,负面反馈可能是合理的,也可能是有益的,但它也可能是痛苦、愤怒和恶意的产物。本文回顾了德国、英国、加拿大和澳大利亚的关键法院判决,在这些地方,心怀不满的从业者对客户/患者和/或出版网站采取的行动取得了成功,尽管专业人士对此类诉讼的传统缺乏信心。它认为,专业人员对其客户/患者采取诽谤行动并试图获得禁令救济以防止持续发布虚假和损害声誉的材料的现象可能会增加,因为受侵害的人可能会在社交媒体和其他在线论坛上发表不受限制和破坏性的出版物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Vindication of Professional Reputation Arising from Defamatory Online Publications
This article identifies the growing phenomenon of professionals suing their clients/patients for online defamation of their professional status and reputation. It reviews the phenomenon of ratings websites and scrutinises the growing popularity of such forms of feedback, identifying benefits but also detriments of such sites, especially when they are commercially influenced or unregulated. It notes that adverse feedback can be legitimate and helpful for both consumers and professionals but that it can also be the product of distress, anger and malice. This article reviews key court decisions in Germany, England, Canada and Australia where actions by disgruntled practitioners against clients/patients and/or publishing websites have succeeded in spite of the traditional diffidence on the part of professionals to engage in such litigation. It argues that the phenomena of defamation actions taken by professionals against their clients/patients and attempts to secure injunctive relief to prevent ongoing publication of false and reputation-damaging material are likely to grow in light of the potential for disinhibited and damaging publications by aggrieved persons on social media and other online forums.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信