California updated its defamation statute. Legislators designed the bill to equalize online and print media outlets. Henceforth, under California’s defamation law, certain digital publications will be treated like daily and weekly newspapers, in terms of libel law. However, parameters exist. Not every website will enjoy cover under the state’s new statute.
Keep reading to learn who is covered and who is not.
In California, Retractions = Lower Defamation Damages
Why did California officials revise the state’s libel law? They wanted to change the way retractions and corrections work, in regards to defamation law.
Back in 1931, California’s lawmakers wanted to limit potential damages in certain types of defamation cases. Specifically, newspapers or broadcasters that issued a correction when prompted by the plaintiff would pay lower damages than if they hadn’t. Oddly, as the law was written, however, the law only applied to newspapers, television and radio broadcasts – but not magazines.
In 2014, defendants in an online defamation case evoked the 1931 statute, arguing that ordered damages were too high because a retraction had been posted. And since, in 21st century life, a website is equivalent to a newspaper, the defendants argued that the lower damage structure should’ve applied.
But a California appeals court disagreed, opting to assert a strict interpretation of the law. The judges ultimately concluded that the state’s current statute didn’t apply to websites.
Why The Old Law Differentiated Between Newspapers and Magazines
When the original California defamation law passed in 1931 (and amended in 1945), the term newspaper was applied to publications that printed on inexpensive paper. These publications were understood to be printed daily.
Judges in the 2014 ruling deduced that should the California’s Legislature intended for the statute to cover online defamatory material, the language of the law had to be updated.
If A Website Publishes Sporadically, It’s Not Covered under California’s New Online Defamation Law
California representative Donald Wagner first introduced the new online defamation bill in 2014. It failed. So, he reintroduced it in 2015 and it passed. The updated bill replaces the word “newspaper” with the phrase “daily or weekly news publication.” To further qualify, publications that want to educe the retraction clause must be publications that contain news on matters of public concern. They must also be published a minimum of once weekly.
Does California’s New Internet Libel Law Discriminate against Certain Types of Platforms?
According to UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh, the new language in the law continues to discriminate among media platforms, but it is all constitutionally permissible.
Under California’s new online defamation statute, media outlets are now differentiated by publishing regularity, not form of publication. A monthly online or print magazine still doesn’t enjoy libel protection under the new rule.
Why do lawmakers make a distinction between publications that publish frequently and those that don’t? Because tight deadlines increase the likelihood of error.
The updated online libel bill takes effect on January 1, 2016.
Kelly Warner: Top Online Defamation Lawyers
Kelly Warner was one of the first legal practices in the country to hone in on issues related to online defamation. Over the years, we’ve successfully litigated on behalf of hundreds of clients dealing with reputation attacks.
Our track record is impressive, and we’re known for being straightforward. We don’t string people along, it’s a waste of their time – and ours. After all, there’s no use in toiling away at an unwinnable case; doing so only diminishes our winning track record.
If you’re serious about getting straight answers regarding your online defamation challenge, contact Dan Warner, Attorney at Kelly / Warner Law.
