{"id":647,"date":"2014-03-28T00:12:53","date_gmt":"2014-03-28T04:12:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/?p=647"},"modified":"2014-03-28T00:12:53","modified_gmt":"2014-03-28T04:12:53","slug":"defamation-law-in-absurdistan-two-pseudonyms-battle-it-out-in-an-ottawa-courtroom-while-freedom-of-speech-is-dealt-a-death-blow","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/?p=647","title":{"rendered":"Defamation Law in Absurdistan: Two pseudonyms battle it out in an Ottawa Courtroom while freedom of speech is dealt a death blow"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n

Defamation Law in Absurdistan: Two pseudonyms battle it out in an Ottawa Courtroom while freedom of speech is dealt a death blow <\/span><\/strong><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

Defamation law in Canada is a glaring example of the archaic state of our laws. This week in an Ottawa courtroom, two Internet bloggers \u2013 who both use pseudonyms \u2013 are going to state their case before a judge.\u00a0 In one corner is the defendant, an inveterate blogger who uses the pseudonym Peter O\u2019Donnell<\/i> (AKA Roger Smith) who is being sued for saying that another pseudonym \u201cDr Dawg<\/i>\u201d (AKA John Baglow) is \u201cone of the Taliban\u2019s more vocal supporters<\/i>\u201d.\u00a0 And caught in the middle are Mark and Connie Fournier who run a message board called FreeDominion, where 1 alias apparently defamed another alias in a back and forth message thread.<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
This case initially started back on August 10, 2010, when pseudonym Peter O\u2019Donnell <\/i>made a posting on FreeDominion (as part of a larger conversation which occurred across multiple blogs).\u00a0 The posting in part said \u201cI will return to that rather astounding claim but first, the other salvo in the offensive, Dr. Dawg’s colourfully illustrated op-ed that describes the conservative base (for which nobody has claimed non-existence) amounts to “yokels with pitchforks.” This coming from one of the Taliban’s more vocal supporters<\/strong>. I suppose they are super-yokels with Kalashnikovs<\/i>.” (Complained of words in bold) [<\/span>Quoted from court judgment on case<\/span><\/span><\/a>)<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
So one Internet pseudonym named Peter O\u2019Donnell <\/i>commented on another internet pseudonym named Dr. Dawg<\/i> in the heat of a spirited debate.\u00a0 How on earth could two internet pseudonyms \u2018slagging\u2019 each other in an online debate \u2026 end up being an on-going 3+ year legal ordeal and costing tens of thousands in legal bills?\u00a0 Welcome to the antiquated world of defamation law and its application to the medium of the Internet.\u00a0 While I am not going to specifically refer to validity of the \u201cDr. Dawg<\/i>\u201d vs \u201cPeter O\u2019Donnell<\/i>\u201d case which is currently before the courts \u2013 I have some thoughts on the law itself.<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
Ontario\u2019s defamation law is absurd in its entirety, a relic of the pre-internet world.\u00a0 Once a defamation claim is filed, <\/span>\u2018damages\u2019 are presumed<\/span><\/span><\/a>.\u00a0 There is a very low bar to meet, which is that the words \u2026 tend to <\/span>lower a person\u2019s \u2018reputation\u2019 in the eyes of a reasonable man<\/span><\/span><\/a>.\u00a0 But in the Blogosphere and the Twitterverse, what does that even mean nowadays?\u00a0 How could you quantify what a person\u2019s alias is really worth and should Canada\u2019s over-burdened court system really be the arbiter of these petty disputes? <\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
The internet is unique as a communications medium.\u00a0 When Ontario\u2019s defamation laws were written; a world where individuals could post and communicate ideas by themselves without vast publishing empire could have never even been conceptualized.\u00a0 Perhaps defamation laws were written to protect the reputations of little people against huge publishing empires. 50 years ago, the only outlet for mass communications were limited to TV stations, newspapers and magazine publishers.\u00a0\u00a0 Nowadays anyone with access to a computer and an idea they wish to communicate can do so with just a few clicks of a button.\u00a0 There is no middle-man controlling the flow of information and this is the inherent design of the Internet, and what makes the internet so popular.<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
The Internet allows all sides of an argument to present their ideas and enables the readers to determine what is correct and reasonable to them.\u00a0 Just take the mystery surrounding Malaysia flight 370<\/strong>.\u00a0 A <\/span>quick google search<\/span><\/span><\/a> shows over 1 million webpages discussing the topic, with comments ranging from terrorism, pilot error, to an equipment malfunction. The free flow of ideas is liberating to see and empowering for the populace. \u00a0Most of those webpages are people without a vast publishing empire, or a multi-billion dollar TV station.\u00a0 Readers who are interested in that topic can peruse the various websites and make a determination themselves<\/i> as to what is real and legitimate information.<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
What role does the court have in this?<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
Thanks to Ontario\u2019s absurd defamation laws, the court has jurisdiction on any information that is from or about someone living in Ontario.\u00a0 As a resident of Ontario, I could file a defamation lawsuit against almost anyone, so long as the information appeared (or was accessible) on a computer in Ontario.\u00a0 If the person was outside of Ontario\/Canada, it might be difficult to collect any purported damages tho.\u00a0 <\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
Take the above mentioned case (indexed by the court as \u201c<\/span>Baglow, a.k.a. “Dr. Dawg” v. Smith, a.k.a. “Peter O’Donnell”, et al.<\/span><\/span><\/a>\u201d).\u00a0 Here you have \u201cDr Dawg\u201d who apparently lives in Ottawa, who sued \u201cPeter O\u2019Donnell\u201d who apparently lives in British Columbia, for a post on a website located in Panama (!), operated by two people apparently living in Kingston, Ontario.\u00a0 Now an Ontario court is going to decide if a pseudonymous posting on a Panamanian webserver was defamatory of pseudonym living in Ottawa? Can it get any more absurd?<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
Defamation law has really \u2018<\/span>jumped the shark\u2019<\/span><\/span><\/a>.\u00a0 When the courts have to sit and be arbitrators for content on a website located 7,000 KMs away, posted between two internet aliases, what has the law really become and how far will the law go to restrict freedom of expression?\u00a0 If \u2018Beast from the East\u2019 can\u2019t be critical of \u2018Vancouver Veronica\u2019 on a website located in Moldova, what value does freedom of speech even have in Ontario?\u00a0 <\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
Under Ontario\u2019s crazy defamation law, Kim Jong Un could file a defamation lawsuit against an Ontario Blogger for poking fun at his recent <\/span>100% election \u2018victory\u2019<\/span><\/span><\/a> via a website in Timbuktu. Is Canada Absurdastan?\u00a0 Absolutely!<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
It\u2019s time to consider a full repeal of Ontario\u2019s defamation law.\u00a0 We have tried this horrible law for over 50 years; why not give freedom a chance?<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
http:\/\/blog.freedomsite.org\/20<\/span><\/span>14\/03\/defamation-law-in-absurdastan-two.html<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Defamation Law in Absurdistan: Two pseudonyms battle it out in an Ottawa Courtroom while freedom of speech is dealt a death blow   Defamation law in Canada is a glaring example of the archaic state of our laws. This week … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[174,246,244,247,173,175],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/647"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=647"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/647\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":648,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/647\/revisions\/648"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=647"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=647"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=647"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}