Posts tagged as:

free speech in Canada

  • “Stamp Out Online Misogyny?” [Wendy Kaminer, Brendan O'Neill]
  • Jacob Mchangama of Danish think tank CEPOS on blasphemy laws and Islam-critical speech [Nov. 4 FedSoc., PDF]
  • Niall Ferguson to sue LRB scribe? “If he won’t apologise for calling me a racist, I will persecute him until he does” [Guardian; more, Atlantic Wire] New York judge quashes subpoena seeking to identify anonymous bloggers in rabbi-defamation suit [Paul Alan Levy]
  • “If bullying has gone down, how can it be a pandemic?” By broadening its definition to include such behaviors as “eye-rolling” and pointed non-invitation [Hans Bader/Examiner, Neal McCluskey/Cato]
  • “I strongly recommend an umbrella policy for all bloggers. Defending myself cost nearly $100,000, thankfully paid by insurance.” [@DianaHsieh]
  • Federal crime under CFAA to lie on the internet? [Kerr, more, yet more, Balko]
  • “Will Canada Repeal its Hate Speech Law?” [Peter Worthington, Frum Forum]

{ 1 comment }

November 11 roundup

by Walter Olson on November 11, 2011

Sighs of relief after a decision in a defamation case (Crooks v. Newton) reported on earlier. [Michael Geist] Justice Abella:

I would conclude that a hyperlink, by itself, should never be seen as “publication” of the content to which it refers.

Adventurous litigants in U.S. defamation cases have occasionally argued otherwise. On Canada, see also proposals to criminalize links to so-called hate speech.

{ 1 comment }

October 4 roundup

by Walter Olson on October 4, 2011

  • Mass torts specialists vs. vendor: “Prominent Plaintiffs’ Attorneys Ordered to Pay Up After Losing Breach of Contract Trial” [Above the Law]
  • “You’ll have to get it on the street” — NYC’s thriving black market in pesticides [NYT, more]
  • Benjamin Barton on his new book, “The Lawyer-Judge Bias” [Truth on the Market, earlier here, etc.]
  • Medicare will not press “secondary payer” liability clawback claims below $300 [Miller and Zois, PoL, NLJ]
  • Class action roundup: “Sleeper” Supreme Court case raises question of whether class action certification requires consumer harm [Fisher/Forbes] Important Easterbrook opinion in Aqua Dots case puts curbs on class certification [PoL, Fisher/Forbes, Beck] Frey, Mortenson et al.: “The non-fiction class action” [Trask, OUP blog; earlier here, etc.]
  • Free speech roundup: Canada proposal could criminalize linking to alleged hate speech [Hosting Industry Watch] More on Canadian denouncers of speechcrime [Ken at Popehat] You don’t say: “$60,000 Ruling Against Truthful Blogger Tests Limits of the First Amendment” [Citizen Media Law] What happens when a defamation plaintiff asks a court for a takedown order? [same] Argentina: subpoenas step up pressure on reporters, editors who report on economy [NYT via Walter Russell Mead]
  • Should the law punish energy companies whose operations kill birds? Depends on whose osprey is being gored [Perry]

{ 2 comments }

Barrick Gold and Banro Corporation have sued three authors of a book that alleged human rights violations in African mining operations; Barrick has also threatened suit against a Vancouver-based publisher over a not-yet-published book. [BoingBoing, Canadian Business, Quill and Quire; FreeSpeechAtRisk.ca]

Ontario is being urged to tackle the problem. “The thing about SLAPPs is they are very effective. They are so effective that you never hear about them, because, the whole thing about them is, they are trying to shut people up,” said an environmentalist who favors broader protection for speech. [The Globe and Mail]

{ 2 comments }

November 30 roundup

by Walter Olson on November 30, 2010

  • Sooooo glad to be an American: that’s how Patrick at Popehat feels following latest Canadian-libel-law outrage directed at conservative blogger Ezra Levant (& see comments for alternate view);
  • Obama has pardoned more turkeys than people. Why? [Dan Froomkin, HuffPo]
  • “Reforming medical malpractice liability through contract” [Michael F. Cannon, Cato Institute working paper, PDF]
  • Memoir of jury foreman in criminal case [Tux Life]
  • Not too sharp: Massachusetts school district disavows policy of not letting students bring pencils to school [Slashdot]
  • State governors have big plans for liability reform. Maybe even loser-pays? [Carter at PoL, more; Florida, Indiana, Tennessee, Texas]
  • Parent who sent buzzworthy demand letter to Kansas City school board is a jazz musician [Wayward Blog, earlier]
  • From comic books to violent videogames: “Our puritanical progressives” [George Will]

{ 15 comments }

April 6 roundup

by Walter Olson on April 6, 2010

{ 2 comments }

“I was hoping for a fruit basket, not a threat to prosecute,” says controversialist Ann Coulter about the menacing letter she got from the provost of the University of Ottawa. [Big Government, Popehat, Legal Blog Watch, WSJ Law Blog] Part of Coulter’s Canadian tour was subsequently called off after security officials said they could not guarantee her safety from protesters. [Moynihan/Reason "Hit and Run"] More: Mark Steyn, Binks. The somewhat attenuated nature of Canada’s rights of free speech is a topic familiar to our readers.

{ 30 comments }

A human rights tribunal has found Canada’s hate-speech law, or at least some applications of it, to be an unconstitutional infringement of free expression. [National Post] Mark Steyn hopes this portends an end to a dark chapter in the nation’s history, but the Western Standard’s Shotgun Blog cautions that the ruling is narrower than one might assume. More: Blazing Cat Fur.

{ 2 comments }

May 14 roundup

by Walter Olson on May 14, 2009

{ 2 comments }

The high-profile Canadian free speech advocate (and target himself of the atrocious attentions of Canada’s speech tribunals) has this to say:

Overlawyered.com is a great U.S. website about the American affliction of too many lawsuits. Canada has a simple rule that America lacks, that has made us far less litigious: in Canadian civil courts, the loser has to pay a portion of the winner’s legal fees. That means nuisance suits are far less common.

Which is why human rights commissions are so bad — they remove that damper on frivolous suits, inviting the worst bullies and harassers to abuse the system….

Background:

{ 1 comment }

April 3 roundup

by Walter Olson on April 3, 2009

  • Those enviro-hazard warnings plastered all over because of Prop 65? They may be not merely pointless but untrue [California Civil Justice; a still-timely 2000 piece]
  • Is it somehow wrong for a public medical examiner to testify against cops — even when it’s in another county? [Radley Balko, Reason]
  • UCLA research scientists fight back against animal rights fanatics’ violence and intimidation [Orac/Respectful Insolence, "Pro-Test"]
  • Ezra Levant, himself a target of Canada’s official speech tribunals, has written a new book denouncing them, buy before they ban it [Amazon; Andrew Coyne, Maclean's] Has odious censorship-complaint-filer Richard Warman finally gotten his comeuppance? [Ken @ Popehat] More: another Warman case [Cit Media Law]
  • Roundup of recent sports/assumption of risk cases [John Hochfelder]
  • Already in trouble on charges of faking a will, Allentown, Pa. police-brutality attorney John Karoly now faces tax charges including alleged failure to report $5 million in income for 2002, 2004 and 2005 [TaxGirl]
  • Lawprof’s “Reparations, Reconciliation and Restorative Justice” seminar led to introduction of Maryland bill requiring insurers to disclose antebellum slaveholder policies [DelmarvaNow]
  • Judge tosses suit by Clarksville, Tennessee officials against activists who called them cozy with developers [Sullum, Reason "Hit and Run"]

{ 4 comments }

March 15 roundup

by Walter Olson on March 15, 2009

  • “Intellectual Easter egg hunt”: great Michael Kinsley column on Wyeth v. Levine and FDA drug preemption [Washington Post]
  • Negligent for the Port Authority to let itself get bombed: “Jury Awards $5.46M to 1993 WTC Bomb Victim” [WINS, earlier]
  • “How following hospital quality measures can kill patients” [KevinMD]
  • Owner of Vancouver Sun suing over someone’s parody of the paper (though at least it drops the printer as a defendant) [Blog of Walker]
  • Court dismisses some counts in Billy Wolfe bullying suit against Fayetteville, Ark. schools [NW Arkansas Times, court records, earlier here and here]
  • Law bloggers were on this weeks ago, now Tenaha, Tex. cops’ use of forfeiture against motorists is developing into national story [Chicago Tribune, earlier here and here]
  • Can hostile blog posts about a plaintiff’s case be the basis for venue change? [IBLS]
  • Calls 911 because McDonald’s has run out of chicken nuggets [Lowering the Bar]

{ 5 comments }

If the political culture up there is so nicey-nice, how come we keep hearing about this pattern again and again?

{ 2 comments }

Following the failure of the commissions to nail journalists Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn over such offenses as printing the Danish Mohammed cartoons and challenging Islamism in Maclean’s, the newest human rights hearing is over “bombastic” and outspoken materials sent by a Saskatchewan member of parliament to constituents in which he decried legal preferences for aboriginal (Indian native) residents and the high rate of crime in native populations. Terry ONeill of the Western Standard calls the investigation of former MP Jim Pankiw “an unprecedented attack on the speech rights of a sitting member of Parliament” (Nov. 3; Ezra Levant, National Post, Oct. 24; CanWest and more).

{ 9 comments }

October 22 roundup

by Walter Olson on October 22, 2008

  • Bulgarians employ “decoy lawyers” to get around corruption in official bureaus [Cowen, MargRev]
  • Forum-shopping vol. MMMCCXII: Taiwan company claims Apple broke California unfair-practices law so of course it sues in Texarkana [AppleInsider]
  • “U.S. produces far too many lawyers for society to absorb” and one reason is that law schools want warm seats on chairs [Greenfield]
  • Second Circuit: lawyers can’t buy their way out of sanctions for filing meritless lawsuit [Krauss, PoL]
  • Some reasons furor over free speech in Canada is relevant this side of the border [Bernstein @ Volokh]
  • We’re quoted on the subject of those websites that offer “point-and-click access to trial lawyers” [Business First of Columbus]
  • Tight lid kept on study of disposable diapers’ environmental impact since findings were … inconvenient [Times Online (U.K.) via Stuttaford]
  • Judge backs Kentucky’s bid to seize domains of online gambling sites, implications for everyone else [Balko, "Hit and Run"; earlier here and here]

The provincial government of British Columbia will not punish the magazine Maclean’s for running an article exposing Islam to asperity (coverage at Steyn’s site). Jay Currie, via Steyn at NRO “Corner”:

…the way I read this decision is that it imposes a two part test a) are your words offensive and hurtful? b) are you a major media organization with deep pockets represented by serious lawyers. If “a” and not “b” you are a hate monger; if “a” and “b” you are engaged in political debate.

Commenter “Binks” at FreeMarkSteyn:

The ordinary Joe or Jane Canuck is no safer today than last year when this all started. The Human Rights Commissions have probably learned only two things: the internet bites back when bloggers get rolling on an issue; and don’t chew on famous and well-connected targets.

{ 3 comments }