This book explores recent legislative activity which highlights the phenomenon of "libel tourism," whereby litigants bring libel suits in foreign jurisdictions in order to take advantage of plaintiff-friendly libel laws.

This book is meant to guide, comfort and support journalists. While they may chafe against the many legal restrictions, they should know that there is a lot they can do and say within the law. With a better understanding of their legal rights, journalists can go about their business with greater confidence, knowing when to yield and when to stand firm. Kathy Ann Waterman Latchoo begins by placing journalism in a constitutional context and ends with an overview on damages for defamation and a glossary of legal terms. She describes our legal systems and the hierarchy of courts, which every journalist should strive to understand, whether or not assigned to the court beat. In Newsroom Law, she seeks to demystify libel law, including the Reynolds public interest defence, which has put fresh emphasis on what constitutes "responsible journalism". Other chapters alert journalists to the legal pitfalls in covering parliamentary affairs, elections and court cases. Cyber-libel, copyright and freedom of information are also included and the chapter on investigative journalism seeks to answer common questions such as whether photographers may use telephoto lenses to capture people in private; whether journalists may record conversations covertly; and whether it is ever permissible to break the law to expose evil.

Sports figures cope with a level of celebrity once reserved for the stars of stage and screen. In Game Faces , Sarah K. Fields looks at the legal ramifications of the cases brought by six of them--golfer Tiger Woods, quarterback Joe Montana, college football coach Wally Butts, baseball pitchers Warren Spahn and Don Newcombe, and hockey enforcer Tony Twist--when faced with what they considered attacks on their privacy and image. Placing each case in its historical and legal context, Fields examines how sports figures in the U.S. have used the law to regain control of their image. As she shows, decisions in the cases significantly affected the evolution of laws related to privacy, defamation, and publicity--areas pertinent to the lives of the famous sports figure and the non-famous consumer alike. She also tells the stories of why the plaintiffs sought relief in the courts, uncovering motives that delved into the heart of issues separating individual rights from the public's perceived right to know. A fascinating exploration of a still-evolving phenomenon, Game Faces is an essential look at the legal playing fields that influence our enjoyment of sports.

Should international law be concerned with offence to religions and their followers? Even before the 2005 publication of the Danish Mohammed cartoons, Muslim States have endeavoured to establish some reputational protection for religions on the international level by pushing for recognition of the novel concept of 'defamation of religions'. This study recounts these efforts as well as the opposition they aroused, particularly by proponents of free speech. It also addresses the more fundamental issue of how religion and international law may relate to each other. Historically, enforcing divine commands has been the primary task of legal systems, and it still is in numerous municipal jurisdictions. By analysing religious restrictions of blasphemy and sacrilege as well as international and national norms on free speech and freedom of religion, Lorenz Langer argues that, on the international level at least, religion does not provide a suitable rationale for legal norms.

Landmark Cases in Defamation Law is a diverse and engaging edited collection that brings together eminent scholars from the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, Canada and New Zealand to analyse cases of enduring significance to defamation law. The cases selected have all had a significant impact on defamation law, not only in the jurisdiction in which they were decided but internationally. Given the formative influence of English defamation law in the United States, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, the focus is predominantly on English cases, although decisions of the United States and Australia are also included in the collection. The authors all naturally share a common interest in defamation law but bring different expertise and emphasis to their respective chapters. Among the authors are specialists in tort law, legal history and internet law. The cases selected cover all aspects of defamation law, including defamatory capacity and meaning; practice and procedure; defences; and remedies.

This book undertakes a comparative study of the public interest and political speech defences in defamation law, particularly from the perspective of the misuse of democratic free expression justifications. Specifically, it argues that the law and legal approaches taken by leading courts and legislatures in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States - five common law comparators - are undertheorised, lack adequate criteria for determining the correct form of the defence, and would benefit from a more precise understanding of 'democracy', 'accountability', and 'representation'. The book will be of great interest to scholars of free speech, defamation and public law.

Landmark Cases in Defamation Law is a diverse and engaging edited collection that brings together eminent scholars from the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, Canada and New Zealand to analyse cases of enduring significance to defamation law. The cases selected have all had a significant impact on defamation law, not only in the jurisdiction in which they were decided but internationally. Given the formative influence of English defamation law in the United States, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, the focus is predominantly on English cases, although decisions of the United States and Australia are also included in the collection. The authors all naturally share a common interest in defamation law but bring different expertise and emphasis to their respective chapters. Among the authors are specialists in tort law, legal history and internet law. The cases selected cover all aspects of defamation law, including defamatory capacity and meaning; practice and procedure; defences; and remedies.

Convicted sexually violent predators are more vilified, more subject to media misrepresentation, and more likely to be denied basic human rights than any other population. Shaming the Constitution authors Michael Perlin and Heather Cucolo question the intentions of sex offender laws, offering new approaches to this most complex (and controversial) area of law and social policy. The authors assert that sex offender laws and policies are unconstitutional and counter-productive. The legislation largely fails to add to public safety-even ruining lives for what are, in some cases, trivial infractions. Shaming the Constitution draws on law, behavioral sciences, and other disciplines to show that many of the "solutions" to penalizing sexually violent predators are "wrong," as they create the most repressive and useless laws. In addition to tracing the history of sex offender laws, the authors address the case of Jesse Timmendequas, whose crime begat "Megan's Law;" the media's role in creating a "moral panic;" recidivism statistics and treatments, as well as international human rights laws. Ultimately, they call attention to the flaws in the system so we can find solutions that contribute to public safety in ways that do not mock Constitutional principles.

In her acclaimed 1993 book Denying the Holocaust, Deborah Lipstadt called David Irving, a prolific writer of books on World War II, "one of the most dangerous spokespersons for Holocaust denial." The following year, after Lipstadt's book was published in the United Kingdom, Irving filed a libel suit against Lipstadt and her publisher. She prepared her defense with the help of a first-rate team of solicitors, historians, and experts, and a dramatic trial unfolded. Denial, previously published as History on Trial, is Lipstadt's riveting, blow-by-blow account of this singular legal battle, which resulted in a formal denunciation of a Holocaust denier that crippled the movement for years to come. Lipstadt's victory was proclaimed on the front page of major news- papers around the world, such as The Times (UK), which declared that 'history has had its day in court and scored a crushing victory.'"

Written by the widely respected author of The Law of Defamation and the Internet, this book analyses the modern law of defamation in a way that consolidates into a coherent structure its various sources - the common law, earlier statutory reforms, European and other foreign influences, and the changes effected by the Defamation Act 2013.
As well as examining the implications of the 2013 reforms, Collins on Defamation dissects, in context, the very large number of ambiguous and contestable questions of construction in, and possibly unintended consequences of, the new law.
The book draws on authorities from a wide international research base to explain the application of relevant principles, including the principles applicable to multi-jurisdictional publications and actions involving one or more foreign litigants.
As well as providing encyclopaedic analysis of the law of defamation, the work contains detailed coverage of relevant conflict of law principles, and important and emerging related causes of action, including misuse of private information, malicious falsehood, data protection rights, and protection from harassment. Comprehensive tables of recent damages awards, and an extensive set of precedents for common notices and pleadings, are also included.
This book is an essential text for any practitioner in the field.

As Charles Dickens nearly said, 'The law is an asterisk' and in the light of enormously increased public interest in the laws of libel, and the confusions and dramas recently involved, David Hooper's highly readable book will inform and entertain in equal measure. Can you sue for a bad reference, a bouncing cheque or a parking ticket? Are you liable if other people repeat your libel? What do you have to prove to establish libel? The cast-list includes the allegedly boring Ken Barlow, Robert Maxwell, the cuckolded judge in the Alan Clark Diaries, Gillian Taylforth of EastEnders and James Hewitt. There is libel in respect of a Christmas card, the corporation of McDonalds, the House of Nomura, Richard Branson and Jeffrey Archer. In this book, even HELLO magazine gets sued for libel - allegedly.