

(UK ruling) Content is 'made available' in jurisdiction where server is located - epo
http://out-law.com/page-11561

======
bdfh42
If it holds up, then that should kill off the constant suing of web site
owners for libel in the UK even when a given site is hosted outside of the UK.
The UK's current libel laws are due a makeover but in the mean time they are
being used to suppress legitimate comment and free speech.

~~~
cstross
The UK is not a single jurisdiction. Scotland has a separate legal system from
England and Wales, based on different principles; while most legislation has
run in parallel since the Act of Union, English libel law doesn't apply in
Scotland -- instead we have a defamation law:

"Under English law ... In the case of libel (the recorded statement), the
victim can win damages even if he has not suffered financial loss as a result
of the statement ... In a Scottish action, _it is necessary to show that some
harm has been caused_ " (Source: <http://www.out-law.com/page-5624> \-- my
emphasis).

This is good news for me personally because my blog sits on a colo box in
Scotland. (And when was the last time you heard of a libel tourist suing
someone in a Scottish court? _Riiight_ ...)

~~~
epo
The principal difference in this regard is that Scotland makes no distinction
between the two forms of defamation that the English call libel ('written')
and slander ('spoken'). The money is in libel.

------
epo
N.B. this has not yet gone to a full trial, this is a preliminary judgement.

~~~
poiuytgfrgyhju
And it's going to last about as long as it takes the court to add up the
income from libel tourists and the losses in people moving their data centres
out of the UK

------
regularfry
That's remarkably sane.

