http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html Feed for English libel laws and science en-gb http://vitae.ac.uk 07-Feb-2010 21:56:48 http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html I think there are three intertwined issues going on in the comments to this article - there's the issue of carriers (ISPs, Amazon, the recent Google Italy case) who don't vet stuff but tend to take it down upon complaint, there's the issue of publishers and editors (the case with the law journal review; various cases involving books where the publisher's been prosecuted for obscenity or similar) in situations where publication implies some form of agreement, and there's cases like that of Simon Singh where it's the actual author of the article is the one being sued. http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html Hi Blanka, I don't disagree with you, but the specific point Elizabeth made was about websites like Amazon which is a different issue. Certainly there is an issue to do with liable in the academic sense of challenging a result, which in my view should if it reaches the courts be dealt swiftly and cheaply through the exchange of evidence. And in terms of a book review liable seems an odd way to suppress it, as if the book challenges the accepted views of a prominent reader you should expect a robust response. As long as the reviewer is careful not to accuse the author of anything, that cannot be substantiated. Lastly I do feel there is a need for liable law, but the issue I feel is one of cost (which too high - justice should never be determined by ability to pay), and burden of proof which is placed on the defendant. http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html Opps, I misremembered that... The pertiant US law, is the DMCA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act 'common carrier' is to do with not being liable for actions during communications (so if I download pirated recording, my ISP cannot be sued for my actions on their service). http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html But the issue is that many of the articles written by people being sued are of public interest (eg Singh pointing out that there is no evidence for chiropractic treatment of childhood diseases, Wilmshurst criticising the conduct of a clinical trial, Goldacre pointingin out the inaccurate claims that the public are subjected to) and should not be withdrawn and apologised for because this is giving the wrong message. http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html Generally speaking it looks to me like libel tends not to make it to court in these cases if the offending material is removed and an appropriate apology made, so if Amazon were to have such an issue then I'm sure they would take that approach and probably the author too. Websites such as this one (and I think Amazon reviews) also have a 'common carrier' (a concept from US law, but a similar defence exists in English law I think) which basicly means that if a website does not have editorial control (that is to say posts are not moderated) then all they need to do is respond when a problem arises. However this defence is not necessarily valid in all countries as the recent case against Google in Italy demonstrates. If the Italian case is not over turned at appeal, expect that web 2.0 type websites will be disabled to Italian users as organisations such as Goggle could not afford the cost of moderating all contributions manually. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/google-guilty-of-privacy-crime-in-web-test-case-1909915.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html Thanks for shedding some light with the links Hannah. I can't believe that such a case has made it to court. In the unlikely event that the prosecution won the case, I wonder what the implications would be for publically generated book reviews such as those on Amazon...? http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html Wow Tennie that is a shocking story. The Singh/BCA case is strange enough, but the idea of an Israeli scholar sueing a US resident in a French court just seems bizarre. I don't understand the detail here, but the review can be found here: http://www.globallawbooks.org/reviews/detail.asp?id=298 and a lengthy response from a very reasonable sounding editor here: http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/20/4/1952.pdf I'm gobsmacked... http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html A different court case, completely different reason for the libel case but involving scholars and also pretty chilling covered in the THE: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=410542&c=1 If I understand it correctly a professor is suing an editor over a (I assume very negative) book review written by another professor... http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html And here is the 'after the court case' analysis: http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/2010/02/good-day-in-court.html http://www.senseaboutscience.org.uk/index.php/site/about/458 http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html Simon Singh has an article in the Telegraph today that people reading this thread might be interested in - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/7294539/Simon-Singh-it-is-too-late-for-me-but-libel-laws-must-change-for-the-public-good.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html In an update on these cases, for any of those interested. The hearing in the Singh vs BCA case is on Tuesday - you can read more about it on the Jack of Kent blog here http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/2010/02/simon-singh-and-court-of-appeal.html I was also interested to discover that the Henrik Thomsen case was dropped by GE helathcare on Thursday after he threatened to countersue the company for calling him a liar, see here http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/feb/18/ge-healthcare-henrik-thomsen-libel http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html Sorry, I meant to say "delay", there goes for rushed postings... Does anyone know how you can edit your comments on this forum/blog (I can only edit my original posts, but not comments on all threads)? Thanks for advice! http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html Apologies for the dely in getting the further details up of ongoing libel law suits being fought in the English courts. Firstly there is Henrik Thomsen vs GE healthcare - Thomsen suggested (in a conference talk and academic article, which is particularly worrying for us researchers) that a gadollinium based tracer developed by GE can be dangerous to people with renal disease and has been sued after he refused to withdraw his claims and apologise. See a recent article in Chemistry World for details: http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2010/January/06011002.asp Secondly, Peter Wilmshurst, a British cardiologists, has been sued by NMT medical, who are a US company developping medical devices. The reason is that he published a clinical trial that had negative results showing that one of the company's devices did not help to deal with migraine. See here for some more details: http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/2009/01/on-new-libel-threat-against-science-nmt.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html Hi Nick, yes, the case is still ongoing. It is complicated by the fact that in the initial hearing on meaning, the judge ruled that his “article was fact (as opposed to comment)” and that it contained “the plainest allegation of dishonesty and indeed it accuse[d] them (the BCA) of thoroughly disreputable conduct.” i.e it was ruled that in his article he was expressing a fact and not his opinion. In the ruling on meaning the judge also ruled that Singh was claiming that the chiropractors were deliberately dishonest in promoting fake treatments (in his words, he was only claiming they were deluded and reckless), which is very hard to defend. In October, Singh got his first (very small!) victory as the Royal Court of Justice gave him permission to appeal this ruling on meaning (something which apparently doesn't take happen very often). And this appeal is due to be held sometime in February/March this year so I guess it is 'watch this space' for us. If you google 'Jack of Kent blog', then you can find a blogger who has written about the case extensively. I don't think it has affected my immediate research and being able to speak out about that, but I think it may be an issue for people who are for instance publishing legitimate research about the inefficiency (above placebo) of homeopathic remedies. And I also believe a researcher was being sued by a pharmaceutical company for pointing out that a certain drug did not work (I will try to dig out the details later). So I guess for me it's a case of supporting these people to be able to speak out about their research, but others may have differing views? Cheers, Blanka http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html Thanks for bringing this up - it is an interesting topic. I haven't seen a direct impact of libel laws on my research career, but there is an off shoot of this where researchers are afraid to make statements that contradict currently held beliefs, for fear of not being accepted. Is the case against Simon Singh still ongoing? If this is (completely ridiculously) the case, to misquote one of my favourite authors, it does seem that the law is indeed "an ass". http://vitae.ac.uk/researchers/213711/English-libel-laws-and-science.html