Dow Jones & Company Inc. V. Gutnick
Introduction
The case of Dow Jones & Company Inc v Gutnick (2002) 210 CLR 575, [2002] HCA 56 raised the legal principle of defamation and its application when committed over the internet. In this instance, an article published on 30 October 2000 in a weekly financial magazine, a magazine which in turn was published by Dow Jones & Company Inc (‘Dow Jones’). The article, entitled ‘Unholy Gains’ alleged that Joseph Gutnick (‘Gutnick’) was connected to a jailed money launderer and tax evader and was involved in these activities himself. The article was accompanied by a large photograph of Gutnick. The edition of the magazine sold 305,363 copies and 550,000 subscribers accessed the article online, with 1,700 of the online subscribers using an …show more content…
At the commencement of the trial, Dow Jones sought to have the proceedings stayed or permanently set aside due to an apparent breach of order 701(i), being that service of the claim was not appropriate as the defamation was not committed in Australia and, based on order 701(j), there was no evidence of damage suffered within the jurisdiction, which Dow Jones believed should be where the article was published, arising from publication of the article in New Jersey. Dow Jones argued that the case should, in fact, be heard in New Jersey as this was where the server was located to which the article had been uploaded and, as such, was the articles place of …show more content…
It is for this very reason that it is imperative that jurisdictions form a concrete basis in how to determine matters of jurisdiction. It appears that whilst Dow Jones has helped Australia develop a common practice in determining jurisdiction based on the place of harm cause and not the place of publication, the constitutional right of free speech in the US is constantly battling the right to protect ones reputation. As much of the population of the US believes freedom of speech to be the most fundamental of all constitutional rights this view does not adequately represent the beliefs of an ever increasing multicultural internet user
The case of Dow Jones & Company Inc v Gutnick (2002) 210 CLR 575, [2002] HCA 56 raised the legal principle of defamation and its application when committed over the internet. In this instance, an article published on 30 October 2000 in a weekly financial magazine, a magazine which in turn was published by Dow Jones & Company Inc (‘Dow Jones’). The article, entitled ‘Unholy Gains’ alleged that Joseph Gutnick (‘Gutnick’) was connected to a jailed money launderer and tax evader and was involved in these activities himself. The article was accompanied by a large photograph of Gutnick. The edition of the magazine sold 305,363 copies and 550,000 subscribers accessed the article online, with 1,700 of the online subscribers using an …show more content…
At the commencement of the trial, Dow Jones sought to have the proceedings stayed or permanently set aside due to an apparent breach of order 701(i), being that service of the claim was not appropriate as the defamation was not committed in Australia and, based on order 701(j), there was no evidence of damage suffered within the jurisdiction, which Dow Jones believed should be where the article was published, arising from publication of the article in New Jersey. Dow Jones argued that the case should, in fact, be heard in New Jersey as this was where the server was located to which the article had been uploaded and, as such, was the articles place of …show more content…
It is for this very reason that it is imperative that jurisdictions form a concrete basis in how to determine matters of jurisdiction. It appears that whilst Dow Jones has helped Australia develop a common practice in determining jurisdiction based on the place of harm cause and not the place of publication, the constitutional right of free speech in the US is constantly battling the right to protect ones reputation. As much of the population of the US believes freedom of speech to be the most fundamental of all constitutional rights this view does not adequately represent the beliefs of an ever increasing multicultural internet user