Online Harassment, Cyberstalking, And Defamation
Overview — Online Harassment, Cyberstalking, and Defamation
Online harassment, cyberstalking, and defamation are criminal or civil offenses arising from misuse of digital platforms to harm, intimidate, or damage the reputation of individuals.
Key Concepts:
Online Harassment: Repeated, unwanted, or aggressive digital communication intended to disturb or intimidate a person.
Cyberstalking: Persistent tracking or monitoring of a person online, often causing fear or emotional distress.
Cyber Defamation: Publication of false statements online that harm the reputation of an individual or organization.
Legislation Examples:
United States: Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, state anti-cyberstalking statutes, defamation laws.
United Kingdom: Protection from Harassment Act 1997, Malicious Communications Act 1988, Defamation Act 2013.
India: Sections 66A, 66E, 67 of the IT Act (modified after Shreya Singhal), and Section 499-500 IPC for defamation.
Enforcement Strategies:
Digital forensics and IP tracing.
Injunctions and restraining orders.
Criminal prosecution for harassment, stalking, or defamation.
Civil remedies such as damages for reputation loss.
Awareness campaigns and reporting platforms.
Key Cases
1) Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015, India)
Facts: Section 66A of the IT Act criminalized sending offensive messages online, leading to arrests over posts on social media.
Outcome: Supreme Court struck down Section 66A as unconstitutional for being vague and overly broad.
Legal Significance:
Protected freedom of speech online while ensuring cyber harassment could still be prosecuted under other laws.
Emphasized precision in defining cyber offenses to prevent misuse.
2) United States v. Lori Drew (2008, U.S.)
Facts: Lori Drew created a fake MySpace profile to harass a teenager, leading to the teen’s suicide.
Outcome: Initially convicted under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act; conviction later vacated.
Legal Significance:
Highlighted challenges in prosecuting online harassment under traditional cybercrime statutes.
Demonstrated the need for specific laws addressing emotional harm and online behavior.
3) R v. S (2018, UK)
Facts: Defendant repeatedly sent threatening emails and harassing messages on social media.
Outcome: Convicted under the Protection from Harassment Act and Computer Misuse Act; sentenced to prison and issued restraining orders.
Legal Significance:
Shows integration of traditional harassment laws with modern digital platforms.
Courts recognize repeated digital communication as harassment.
4) Tamiz v. Google (2013, UK)
Facts: Plaintiff claimed defamatory statements were published online on forums, damaging his reputation.
Outcome: Court held Google liable to remove defamatory content under intermediary liability rules.
Legal Significance:
Recognized platforms’ responsibility in cyber defamation.
Highlighted the role of intermediaries in enforcing digital reputation protection.
5) United States v. Michael S. (2017, U.S.)
Facts: Defendant cyberstalked an ex-partner, sending threatening messages and tracking her online activities.
Outcome: Convicted under federal cyberstalking laws; sentenced to imprisonment and restraining orders.
Legal Significance:
Reinforced that persistent online monitoring causing fear is criminal.
Digital evidence can be used to establish intent and pattern of harassment.
6) Dhir v. State of Maharashtra (2016, India)
Facts: Online defamation through WhatsApp messages and social media posts accusing a businessperson of fraud.
Outcome: Court ordered the removal of posts and imposed criminal liability under Section 500 IPC for defamation.
Legal Significance:
Demonstrated applicability of traditional defamation laws in digital spaces.
Courts can issue injunctions and enforce penalties against online content creators.
7) R v. Constable & Ors (2019, UK)
Facts: Police officers harassed a colleague via emails and social media, creating a hostile online work environment.
Outcome: Convicted under the Protection from Harassment Act; disciplinary action in workplace.
Legal Significance:
Cyber harassment laws apply to professional and workplace environments.
Emphasizes psychological harm as a key factor in prosecution.
Themes Across Cases
Legal Modernization: Laws have evolved to include online communications and digital platforms.
Civil and Criminal Remedies: Courts combine restraining orders, injunctions, fines, and imprisonment.
Platform Accountability: Social media and hosting platforms can be held responsible for removing defamatory or harassing content.
Evidence Gathering: Digital forensics, email tracking, and IP tracing are crucial for prosecution.
Balance of Rights: Courts aim to balance freedom of speech with protection from harassment and defamation.
RELATED Blog
comments