This examination concludes that the legislative proposals fill significant gaps in the protection offered by self-regulatory schemes and current privacy laws. Libel Capital No More? Further, a January ruling of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg is likely to reduce the costs facing unsuccessful defendants in some British defamation cases. In addition, and most significantly, the British government released proposals for far-reaching reform of defamation law in March This article analyzes the potential reforms of British defamation law.
Fourth, the article considers the extent to which the completed and the proposed reforms may ameliorate the perceived shortcomings of British defamation law, and discusses problems that are likely to endure. The conclusion notes that major reform of long-criticized defamation law in Britain may finally be at hand, though much remains to be done. California upon its fortieth anniversary. The legacy, the paper illustrates, is about far more than just protecting offensive expression.
The paper then illustrates how lower courts, at the state and federal levels, have used Cohen to articulate a laundry list of principles regarding First Amendment jurisprudence.
Finally, the U. Phelps demonstrates that, at least for today, the right-to-offend principle is alive and well. In particular, the paper explores whether the doctrine, which was designed to address face-to-face confrontations and responsive violence, can be narrowly modified and adapted to apply to new modes of real-time, electronic communication, including texts, instant messages and e-mails.
In the process of analyzing this issue, the paper addresses the U. Stevens for creating new categories of unprotected expression and queries whether this would translate to an equal unwillingness to modify extant categories of unprotected expression.
