Image: Getty Images
A defamation law expert criticized the federal government the so-called anti-trolling billaccused it of changing Australia’s defamation law without good cause and through misleading means.
Lawyer Sue Chrysanthou SC, representing some of Australia’s preeminent libel experts, said: “My colleagues and I think the law is misunderstood and should not be pursued.”
“None of the proponents of this act have given a proper reason, to the best of my knowledge or the knowledge of my colleagues, as to why it should be changed… The bill This is a violent attack on torture and defamation by the Commonwealth, for which no basis or reasonable reason has been provided.”
Attorney Sue Chrysanthou SC made those comments ahead of a Senate constitutional and legal committee hearing Tuesday afternoon, which is currently conducting an investigation into the Bill. She added that the Bill does not address abuse or online trolling.
At its core, the Bill seeks to remove the liability of owners of social networking sites for any defamatory material posted on those sites. If passed, it would also create a requirement for social media companies to identify people if they post potentially defamatory material.
The bill was established shortly after a Supreme Court ruling ruled that media outlets are considered publishers of third-party comments on their social media pages.
Laws against trolling already in place get piece from senators, online abuse victims and government agencies, with Australia’s eSafety commissioner criticizing the law due to it no mention of the word “troll”.
“One of our objections to this Bill is that it’s patchy. It would increase legal costs and cause confusion because it’s inconsistent with state and territory laws,” Chrysanthou said. with the committee.
Liberal senator and committee chair Sarah Henderson, who claimed she was smeared on Twitter, dismissed Chrysanthou’s arguments because the attorney had not sued Twitter before.
“This bill is all about Facebook. This bill is about Instagram. It’s about Twitter. It’s about unmasking anonymous abusers, about remediation,” Henderson said.
In response to Henderson’s comments, Chrysanthou said in her experience it is not necessary to sue Twitter or Facebook for defamation.
“Any client I’ve ever sued over a tweet or Facebook post, the creators of those tweets or Facebook posts have been identified. That’s a big part of my practice – taking action on behalf of people suing over social media posts So far she said there is no need to deal with Twitter or Facebook.
At the beginning of the day, Twitter appeared before the committee to call Australia’s anti-trolling laws an extreme risk to the privacy of Australians, especially minority communities.
“We’ve seen a number of people from both the whistleblower space and domestic violence situations, who identify within the LGBTQIA community, use anonymous or synonymous accounts as a way and basically Text is an input to conversations on important issues,” said Twitter director for Australian Policy Kara Hinesley.
“We think there are potential safety concerns that would be an outcome contrary to the Bill’s stated intent.”
RELATED INSURANCE
