Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (620,000)
UTM (20,000)
CCT (1,000)
CCT206H5 (100)
Lecture 5

CCT206H5 Lecture Notes - Lecture 5: Qualified Privilege, Libel Tourism, Cybersquatting

by

Department
Communication, Culture and Technology
Course Code
CCT206H5
Professor
Anthony Wensley
Lecture
5

This preview shows half of the first page. to view the full 2 pages of the document.
CCT206 – WEEK 5
Relevant legislation: Lanham (1946); TM Dilution (1995); Revision (2006);
Cybersquatting Consumer Protection (1999); TM (1985, amended 2015)
Blurring: confusion around company/services
Tarnishment: undermine company values (ex. Victor’s Little Secret)
Domain names as TMs: hosts own them
ACPA (1999): cause of action against registrant
Owner can file in rem
Defenses:
1. Fair use
2. Parody
CDA (1999): Online Auctions, TM Infringement
Penalties: injunction, monetary damages
TPP & Trademark
Geographical indications
CCT206 – Week 6 – Defamation
Libel: law presumes you have suffered damages w. perm. record
Slander: must prove you suffered damages w. no perm. record
Defenses:
Justification: law presumes statement is false; must be proven true
Absolute privilege: speak freely wo. fear of liability (ie in court)
Qualified privilege: remarks that are otherwise defamatory conveyed to 3rd party
Fair comment: speaking out about issues of public issues
Responsible communication on matters of public interest: have to report, even if
untrue (ie. Journalists)
Innocent dissemination: 2ndry publication (passive)
Libel tourism: taking adv. of weak libel laws in foreign countries
Gutnick case: defamation laws at place of download, not upload
Online reviews: “untrue statements”, damage reputation; companies use ‘scare tactics’
Twibel case (Courtney Love): 1st Twitter libel case
Cases to know:
Gutnick v. Dow Jones
Courtney Love
Videos:
CLV group vs. student
Lerners -> Internet Defamation
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version