Keith-Smith_v_Williams

<i>Keith-Smith v Williams</i>

Keith-Smith v Williams

Add article description

Keith-Smith v Williams is a 2006 English libel case that confirmed that existing libel laws applied to internet discussion.[1]

Quick Facts Keith-Smith v Williams, Court ...

It was important because it was seen as the first UK internet libel case that represented two individuals rather than one party being an Internet Service Provider,[2] and was the first British case involving a successful prosecution of an individual poster within a chat room.[3][4] The Manchester Evening News claimed that this contradicted a common assumption among bloggers that it was the publisher and not the writer who was responsible for any libel claims that they may generate.[5]

Mark Stephens, the head of media law at Stephens Finer Innocent, characterised the case as "a dark day for freedom of speech with broad implications",[6] which was denied by the plaintiff Michael Keith Smith.[7]

The case involved unemployed ex-teacher Tracy Williams falsely accusing a former UKIP candidate, Michael Keith Smith, of being a sexual offender and racist bigot.[8] Williams had posted as Gosforth.[9]

The court ordered her to pay £10,000 plus costs.[10][11] Although the accusations were made in a Yahoo discussion group with about 100 members, damages were awarded as the remarks were available throughout the world.[12]

References

  1. [1]
    Warning to chatroom users after libel award for man labelled a Nazi, Owen Gibson, 23 March 2006, The Guardian
  2. [2]
    "In Keith-Smith v Williams, the Claimant a former UK Independence party member has been awarded 10,000 GB Sterling and is important as it represents probably the first case of two private individuals at court as well as the use or abuse of blogging." Libel on the Internet? Archived 15 January 2013 at the Wayback Machine, Michael Coyle, Lawdit Solicitors
  3. [3]
    Chat room insults lead to internet libel victory
  4. [4]
    more about that UK libel decision Archived 20 October 2006 at the Wayback Machine, cybersoc.com
  5. [5]
    Bloggers beware of libel trials by Simon Donohue, Friday, 24 March 2006
  6. [6]
    Verdict casts dark cloud over freedom of speech, Times, 22 March 2006
  7. [7]
    Free speech and internet law, Letters to the Editor, Times, 28 March 2006
  8. [8]
    Online libel costs woman £10,000, BBC, 22 March 2006
  9. [9]
    legal case transcript
  10. [10]
    [http://www.ukip.org/ukip_news/gen12.php?t=1&id=2006 UKIP can didate wins £10,000 for internet libel] Archived 13 October 2006 at the Wayback Machine
  11. [11]
    Damages on Online Defamatory Statements in UK Archived 9 October 2006 at the Wayback Machine EDRI.org
  12. [12]
    Smith v Williams (UK, 2006) Caslon Analytics
Share this article:

This article uses material from the Wikipedia article Keith-Smith_v_Williams, and is written by contributors. Text is available under a CC BY-SA 4.0 International License; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.