网站诽谤与单一出版规则

IF 1.9 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Sapna Kumar
{"title":"网站诽谤与单一出版规则","authors":"Sapna Kumar","doi":"10.2307/1600592","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The single publication rule was created to compensate libel victims for reputational harm without crippling the publishing industry. During the nineteenth century, American courts followed the multiple publication rule.1 In 1849 an English court established this rule,2 which states that each delivery of a libelous statement to a third party constitutes a new publication of the libel, which in turn gives rise to a new cause of action.3 As mass publishing became more common during the twentieth century, courts faced a dilemma. The multiple publication rule was adopted when communities were small and circulation of printed materials was limited, thus inherently limiting the burden that publishers accused of libel could face. But with technological breakthroughs such as the modern printing press, a single libelous statement could now reach millions of readers and lead to a staggering number of lawsuits.5 Courts became concerned that the statute of limitations would no longer be effective if it were renewed every time a new party saw the libelous statement.6 A rule was needed that would give libel victims adequate means to seek redress without forcing publishers to face countless lawsuits for an indefinite span of time. Consequently, courts began to adopt the single publication rule. Under this rule, a libel victim would have only one cause of action for the mass or aggregate","PeriodicalId":51436,"journal":{"name":"University of Chicago Law Review","volume":"72 1","pages":"639-662"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2003-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Website Libel and the Single Publication Rule\",\"authors\":\"Sapna Kumar\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/1600592\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The single publication rule was created to compensate libel victims for reputational harm without crippling the publishing industry. During the nineteenth century, American courts followed the multiple publication rule.1 In 1849 an English court established this rule,2 which states that each delivery of a libelous statement to a third party constitutes a new publication of the libel, which in turn gives rise to a new cause of action.3 As mass publishing became more common during the twentieth century, courts faced a dilemma. The multiple publication rule was adopted when communities were small and circulation of printed materials was limited, thus inherently limiting the burden that publishers accused of libel could face. But with technological breakthroughs such as the modern printing press, a single libelous statement could now reach millions of readers and lead to a staggering number of lawsuits.5 Courts became concerned that the statute of limitations would no longer be effective if it were renewed every time a new party saw the libelous statement.6 A rule was needed that would give libel victims adequate means to seek redress without forcing publishers to face countless lawsuits for an indefinite span of time. Consequently, courts began to adopt the single publication rule. Under this rule, a libel victim would have only one cause of action for the mass or aggregate\",\"PeriodicalId\":51436,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"University of Chicago Law Review\",\"volume\":\"72 1\",\"pages\":\"639-662\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"University of Chicago Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/1600592\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Chicago Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/1600592","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

单一出版规则的制定是为了在不损害出版业的情况下补偿诽谤受害者的名誉损害。在19世纪,美国法院遵循多重出版规则1849年,一家英国法院确立了这一规则2,该规则规定,每向第三方发表一次诽谤性声明,即构成对该诽谤的新发表,从而产生新的诉因随着大众出版在20世纪变得越来越普遍,法院面临着两难境地。多重出版规则是在社区较小、印刷品流通有限的情况下采用的,因此从本质上限制了被指控诽谤的出版商可能面临的负担。但是,随着诸如现代印刷术等技术的突破,一条诽谤性的声明现在可以触及数百万的读者,并导致数量惊人的诉讼法院开始担心,如果每次有新的当事人看到诽谤性声明就延长诉讼时效,那么诉讼时效将不再有效需要制定一项规则,使诽谤受害者有足够的手段寻求赔偿,而不会迫使出版商在无限期的时间内面临无数的诉讼。因此,法院开始采用单一公布规则。根据这一规则,诽谤受害者只有一个集体诉讼理由
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Website Libel and the Single Publication Rule
The single publication rule was created to compensate libel victims for reputational harm without crippling the publishing industry. During the nineteenth century, American courts followed the multiple publication rule.1 In 1849 an English court established this rule,2 which states that each delivery of a libelous statement to a third party constitutes a new publication of the libel, which in turn gives rise to a new cause of action.3 As mass publishing became more common during the twentieth century, courts faced a dilemma. The multiple publication rule was adopted when communities were small and circulation of printed materials was limited, thus inherently limiting the burden that publishers accused of libel could face. But with technological breakthroughs such as the modern printing press, a single libelous statement could now reach millions of readers and lead to a staggering number of lawsuits.5 Courts became concerned that the statute of limitations would no longer be effective if it were renewed every time a new party saw the libelous statement.6 A rule was needed that would give libel victims adequate means to seek redress without forcing publishers to face countless lawsuits for an indefinite span of time. Consequently, courts began to adopt the single publication rule. Under this rule, a libel victim would have only one cause of action for the mass or aggregate
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
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
2
期刊介绍: The University of Chicago Law Review is a quarterly journal of legal scholarship. Often cited in Supreme Court and other court opinions, as well as in other scholarly works, it is among the most influential journals in the field. Students have full responsibility for editing and publishing the Law Review; they also contribute original scholarship of their own. The Law Review"s editorial board selects all pieces for publication and, with the assistance of staff members, performs substantive and technical edits on each of these pieces prior to publication.
×
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