Defamation And Free Speech In England And Russia Law Essay

Defamation And Free Speech In England And Russia Law Essay The basis of modern society is formed by the fundamental human right of freedom of speech. The importance of having this fundamental right is immense. In order for this world to continue modernizing, it is very important to let every individual voice his/her opinion. However, in certain situations what one person says (intentionally or unintentionally) might harm the reputation of another person. I believe that defamation law and freedom of speech are two different sides of the same coin. They always go together, yet talk about two contradicting concepts. If freedom of speech gives everyone the right to express themselves, then defamation limits this right, in order to protect the reputation of individuals from being harmed. Every country has its own coin which is unique in its own way. This means that every legal system has its own way of evaluating freedom of speech and defamation law. Therefore, I think, it will be interesting to make compare the defamation law in the Russian lega l system and the defamation law in the English legal system, as they are both part of completely different legal traditions. By examining these two different jurisdictions, I will try to evaluate whether defamation law infringes the fundamental human right of speech. Defamation law in England: General overview (Defamation and Free Speech): Defamation is quite different from the other torts because, unlike the others it protects something that is indistinct; it protects the claimants reputation (not personal safety or personal integrity, unlike the other torts). Since it protects something so abstract, it can be difficult to actually reach a fair conclusion. Thus, the question here arises that what is defamatory and did it really harm the reputation of the claimant. It should be clarified as to what is actually meant by harm the reputation of the claimant. This phrase means that certain comments/statements have caused the claimant to be avoided and shunned by the right-thinking members of the society. Defamation can be made in two forms, either libel (i.e. permanent/written form) or slander (i.e. auditory form). In order to give rise to liability in defamation the claimant has to mainly prove three things. Firstly, the statement has to be defamatory (i.e. should harm the reputation of the claimant). Secondly, the claimant also has to prove that the statement was in fact referring to the claimant and not someone else. Thirdly, the defamatory statement was demonstrated to a third party (by third party, it is meant at least one other person). Moreover, in cases of slander the claimant also has to prove that the statement caused actual damage (i.e. financial loss). Once the claimant proves these things, the burden of proof falls on the defendant, because the statement(s) is/are presumed to be false.  [1]   When it comes to human rights, especially free speech, many critics believe that the English legal system does a poor job of protecting it. The main reason is believed to be the fact the Great Britain does not have a written constitution. Therefore, the interpretation of human rights lies in the hands of the judges (who can be very subjective). However, things have changed slightly since the introduction of European Human Rights Convention and 1998 Human Rights Act, both of which have helped the English law to develop and also clarify certain points. Nevertheless in certain situations it can be seen that the English law still struggles to provide justice to these acts  [2]  . This was the case in R v Shayler, where Mr. Shayler, a former member of the Security Service, disclosed that MI5 kept files on future labour ministers, alleged incompetence relating to the IRA bombing of Bishopsgate in the City of London in 1993, and the bombing of the Israeli embassy in London a year later, and that MI6 was involved in a plot to assassinate the Libyan leader, Muammar Gadafy, in 1995. The defence of Mr. Shayler was based on the freedom of expression and public interest. He was charged under the Official Secrets Act 1989 which prohibited any member of the security and intelligence services, from disclosing any information about his/her work. However, according to Mr. Shayler this act was incompatible with article 10 of the Convention and it violated his right of free speech. Nonetheless, the House of Lords decided unanimously to dismiss his appeal  [3]  . Consequently, I personally believe that it can be seen from the type of information Mr. Shayler disclosed, that he acted in public interest. Defences: Defences are given more importance in defamation than in other aspects of tort. The defences are given such immense importance, in order to avoid violating the constitutional right of free speech. Moreover, it is not very difficult for the claimant to establish the elements of defamation. Once the claimant established the elements, it is up to the defendant to prove his/her innocence. Therefore, defences are of enormous importance. There are certain defences which help the defendant to do so, for example, Justification (truth), privilege, fair comment and defence of innocent publication under s. 1 Defamation Act 1996. Other than these defences, there are some others, which help the defendant to remove the liability, for example, offer of amends under s.2 Defamation Act 1996 and expiry of limitation period  [4]  . Since the statement made by the claimant is assumed to be false, the defence of justification tells that whatever the defendant published was true and thus the claimant has no right to complain about true statements which lower his/her reputation. Moreover, if the defendant has made a number of distinct charges against the claimant, then it will be sufficient that the defendant proves the truth of most of the charges such that the other statements do not injure the claimants reputation materially. Defamatory statements made on a privileged occasion are not actionable. Privileged occasions are those, where public interest in freedom of speech is such that it overrules any concerns as to the effect of this freedom on the claimants reputation.  [5]  There are two types of privileges, absolute and qualified. Absolute privilege applies to statements made in Parliament, court hearings, any document ordered to be published by House of Parliament and communications between certain officers of state. Qualified privilege applies to an occasion where the person who makes a communication has an interest or a duty (legal, social, or moral) to make it to the person to whom it is so made has a corresponding interest or duty to receive it.  [6]  The rationale for this is said to be the common convenience and welfare of society. Unlike absolute privilege, the defence of qualified privilege will be defeated if malice is proved. Fair comment protects the defendants right to criticize the claimant, which is why the defendant does not have to show that his/her words are true. However, this right to criticize is kept within strict boundaries. In order to qualify for this defence the defendant must prove that he/she was acting in public interest. Moreover the defendant should also show that the statement was based upon a set of facts and that the defendant honestly held that opinion. If a person was involuntarily or unknowingly involved in the process of publication of the defamatory material, then the defence of innocent publication (under s.1 of DA 1996) will apply to him/her. The defendant should prove that he/she took reasonable care in relation to the statements publication. Moreover, he/she should also prove that he/she had no reason whatsoever to believe that his/her actions caused or contributed to the publication of a defamatory statement. This defence cannot be applied to the author, editor or publisher. If the defendant has unintentionally defamed the claimant, then he/she can make an offer of amends (i.e. publish an apology). If the claimant accepts this offer then the proceedings would end, however, if the claimant refuses to accept it, then this would become a defence for the defendant. The expiry of the limitation period cannot be really regarded as a defence; it is more of an assertion that the claimant has run out of time to bring his/her claims for defamation. It is obvious from the defences mentioned above, that English law tries to take reasonable care to protect free speech from being violated. However, the question which arises here is whether these defences are enough. I personally think that it is not enough, because despite the strong defences there are still some major glitches in the system. The main example would be the unnecessarily high costs of bringing up a defamation lawsuit. Since legal aid is not available, the cost of hiring a lawyer is relatively high. This leads us to think that defamation law is only for the rich and the poor cannot seek justice from it. Defamation in Russian Law General Overview (defamation and free speech): In the Russian legal system, up until the last decade of 20th century, defamation was a part of the criminal law. The Russian Criminal Code contains five articles which deal with defamation. In order to sue for criminal defamation the claimant must prove that the statement was made with malicious intent to harm the claimants reputation. Furthermore, the claimant must also prove that the defendant knew that the statement was false. In the past two decades, due to the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Russian law underwent some major reforms, such as the introduction of defamation in civil law. Civil defamation is covered by various articles of the Russian Civil Code. According to article 152 of the Civil Code, the elements required in order to establish civil defamation are: dissemination of information, information must be defamatory; the information must be false, the information should be of factual nature, and the information should be referring to the claimant. The claimant only needs to prove that the statement was published, other than this the burden of proof falls on the defendant. Defences  [7]  : Russian civil defamation law mainly focuses on how to deal with the defendant who is found guilty. This can be seen in the emphasis placed by these requirements on the grounds for bringing a defamation lawsuit, how the defamatory statement will be refuted and how the compensation should be awarded. The main problem with these rules is that they contain very little information on how the defendant may defend him/herself. The defences are provided under international law. First, a defendant should be given a fair opportunity to prove that the statement made by him/her is true. If the defendant succeeds in doing so, it removes liability from the defendant. Second, if the statement was made in public interest and it was reasonable in all circumstances for the defendant to publish the information in the form he/she did, then the defendant can benefit from the defence of reasonable publication. Finally, the defendant cannot be liable if the statement actually expresses his/her opinion. An opinion is defined as a statement which does not include any factual expression or cannot reasonably be interpreted as a fact, because of the language or context. Evaluation: Defamation law and free speech are both equally important concepts in our society. One persons right of free speech should be balanced against another persons right to being protected against being defamed by lies. Therefore it is crucial to exercise freedom of speech and defamation law helps to do so. I personally believe, that defamation law is one of the most important part of tort law, since it protects people against those false statements which might harm their reputation. Moreover, defamation law tries its level best not to infringe free speech. The defences used in defamation law try to create a balance between freedom of speech and defamation. However, in certain cases freedom of speech ends up getting violated. In England free speech is fundamental human right which is granted by the common law and protected by the statute law. Provisions are taken by the judiciary in order to avoid violating the constitutional right of freedom of speech. This can be seen in English defamation law, which has a lot of defences which help the defendant to protect his/her interests (i.e. free speech). However, compared to other common law countries, for example USA, the English defamation law has some glitches. The main example would be placing the burden of proof on the defendant or assuming that the statement made by the defendant is false. I think that this places the defendant in an unfair position. In Russian law, the defences are very limited and the punishment is greater because defamation in Russian law is regarded as a criminal offence in certain cases. I think that defamation should not be regarded as a criminal offence under any circumstances because it creates an impermissible chilling effect stemming the flow of protected speech.  [8]  Moreover, the burden of proof shifts improperly, thus, requiring the defendant to prove his/her innocence. I believe that Russian defamation law needs to cut out defamation from criminal law completely. It can be seen that compared to English defamation law; Russian defamation law limits free speech to a greater extent. The main reasons are limited number of defences and defamation being a part of the criminal law. However, the Russian law has tried to improve the situation by implementing defamation in their Civil Code. The result of my research says, that despite the fact that the defences help to minimize the negative effect of defamation law on free speech it can be said that almost every legal system infringes free speech to some extent. The main reason for this is limited number of defences (in the case of Russian law) and in some cases the judges tend to favour the protection of reputation more than free speech.

Pricing and the Psychology of Consumption

Business’s try to maximize consumption is a variety of different ways. Price bundling can damage the loyalty that a customer has with a particular business. Maintaining customer loyalty through consumption is directly correlated to the success of the business. If a business cannot establish a relationship with the customer and create a demand for the customer, the likelihood of that customer returning is very slim. The example that the article used was related to fitness memberships. If the fitness center charges an annual fee at the initial registration, it is likely that the customer will use the membership less frequently throughout the year. The downfall to this approach is that the customer will likely not renew its membership in the following year. Another option a fitness club may offer would be to have the customer sign a year contract and bill the customer monthly instead of one lump some annually. This method is more effective because the customer is aware on a monthly basis of what he or she paying. This creates loyalty between the customer and the fitness center and studies suggest that the customer is more than likely to renew there contract the following year. The fitness center that I attend has you sign a contract at the time you register and charges you on a monthly basis. After looking at the contract I noticed that, although they bill me monthly throughout a calendar year, I would have to pay cancellation penalty if I decided end the contract before the end of a specific calendar year. For example, if I cancelled my contract in May, I would have to pay a lump sum for the remainder of the months in that specific calendar year. Pricing and payment terms can help a business’s hide the actual cost of a particular product and or service. Cash, credit cards and charge accounts are the three main methods of purchasing among most consumers. The fact of the matter is that a customer is less likely to be price sensitive if they either purchases with a credit card or use there charge account. Customers that purchase with cash see the immediate impact financially speaking. The challenge most marketing managers’ face is developing a marketing action plan to capitalize on increasing consumption while maintaining customer loyalty. This may sound easier said than done especially after considering that most often decisions are dependent on price. One of my company’s main goals is to open customer charge accounts. Research has shown that a customer is fives times more likely to spend more money if they have a charge account rather than if the where going to purchase with cash or a credit card. This relates to the example in the article â€Å"buy now, pay later. The pros and cons of consumption on the basis of pricing vary from industry to industry. For instance, the marketing team for a semi-pro baseball team decides to pre-sale all there tickets at the beginning of the year. They chose to mirror a professional baseball team because of there success in pre-selling tickets. The pro’s they had was that they secured the money upfront for the entire season. This was an increase in tickets sales than they had from the following year, so in the first quarter of the season they thought they had made the correct decision. The con’s came as the season went on. They noticed the ticket holder’s attendance was decreasing. This may not seem to be a problem at first because the organization already collected the money. What they came to realize was that they where losing money on all the other amenities that the stadium sold: food, apparel, beer. It is important for marketing managers to understand there customers needs. Increased customer consumption can be rewarding in some businesses and detrimental to the success of others.

Leap Motion: the Future Is Now Essay

The next destination on our path to creating technology beyond the current human comprehension; is it a massive super weapon to dominate our rivals? Is it a horde of medical nanobots, which can repair your body from the inside out? Nope. This little box, about the size of an iPhone, is the Leap Motion, a completely hands-free virtual reality mouse. It may not be as nice as the nanobots, but it’s definitely useful for the common nerd! When plugged into the USB port of your computer and its software installed, this device creates a 3D interaction space around it’s sensor bar, containing an area of approximately eight cubic feet. Leap Motion Inc. , the developer of Leap Motion, claims this device is able to sense and track your individual finger, hand, and arm movements within one hundredth of a millimeter. It can differentiate between fingers, thumbs, and pens/pencils, and react differently depending on which was moved. Though I personally feel this would take some practice to get used to, Leap Motion Inc. ssures on its website that the Leap Motion is â€Å"Intuitive and easy to use†, as well as saying â€Å"No one needs an instruction manual for their hands. † Leap Motion’s inspiration came from 3D computer modeling. The developers felt that the mouse and keyboard were impeding the process, and thus the light bulb flicked on. Leap Motion Inc. ’s target consumer group is â€Å"Everyone! † Several of the examples listed on the official site, linked in the footer, are artists, engineers, gamers, surgeons, and private consumers. This brand new technology has several possible uses, in addition to bringing Tom Cruise-esque1 control to our computers. Imagine if you will, a surgery room. A doctor is preforming a liver transplant on a patient, and right in the most critical part of the operation, the patient flatlines. The doctor is confused. He did everything right, and he doesn’t know what caused the complication. He turns around and, without removing his gloves, turns on a laptop computer and does a search of the patient’s medical files, to find that he/she is allergic to the particular anesthesia they used. A quick shot of adrenaline is enough to save their life-thanks to a speedy response. This scenario, though explained in detail by myself, was one of several featured by the Leap Motion webpage. I believe that this technology will quickly gain ground in the market, and improvements will be continued to be created. Perhaps Leap Motion Inc. will expand to be the Apple of the 21st century,2 eh? This might be a good time to invest in some stock, in my opinion (Actually, I attempted to find their stock, and they aren’t listed, at least not yet). Unfortunately, this is about all the information that’s been currently released on the Leap Motion. There is no Wikipedia page for it yet, and Leap Motion Inc. is being very selective about the information it releases. Currently, the Leap Motion is available for preorder, with an expected release sometime during the beginning of the 2013 year. The Leap Motion’s preorder for $69. 99 USD, and is available on the official website which is, again, linked in the footer. I hope to follow this, and to definitely purchase its stock when it becomes available.

The New Avenue Of Expression And Liberty - 1740 Words

In the 1950’s, every social issue elicited a zealous response from both opposers and advocates alike. Each and every person ripped their hearts out and slapped it on their shirts and America became a front for freedom fighting. People fought for gay and lesbian rights, civil rights, women’s rights, reformation of standard narrative values, and sexual exploration. People wanted to be delivered and they battled for a new avenue of expression and liberty. Though they yearned for this, there was one thing people wanted to suppress: Communism. In the 50’s, people were sick of the Hammer and Sickle. They wanted the bright red Commie flag to be crimson with Marxist-Leninist blood. Not a single virtue of the Communist theory was allowed into the†¦show more content†¦The ultimate goal of Communism is to create a Communist Society. This is a state where there is no social hierarchy, no money, and no government. Communism allows for more equality than Democracy and as much freedom as Anarchy. As well as this, a Communist Society would be able to greatly reduce working hours for people by automating production and eliminating the inherent exploitation between laborer and owner. This would allow people to have the time and the resources to be pursue their hobbies and interests, be creative, and, in general, contribute to the intellectual wealth of the society. Although it comes in a plethora of variations, this is the most common and basic form of Communism. And as he was writing the Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx wouldn’t have predicted the cataclysm that would ensue in America because of this idea. As the Cold War continuously grew more and more intense in the 50’s, fear of a supposed Communist threat on US soil became known as the Second Red Scare (the first one happened in 1919). This phobia of Reds led to exceptionally paranoid behavior and policies from the government and society as a whole. Dreading that Commies may be working inside the government, the unconstitutional House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) was organized. HUAC’s goal was to expose any Communists working for the state and to