Libel in publishing

[mbaldw]

Hi folks,

I'm not sure where this best fits, so please feel free to move it if there is a more appropriate forum. I'm after some advice on the law around publishing.

An elderly acquaintance of mine has recently written a book and, after various unsuccessful attempts to find a publisher for it, I agreed to ‘publish it’ (by which I mean help format and distribute via my website) for him. We had some minor disagreements over some of the interpretations he had made in his text, but nothing we couldn’t work out; until, that is, he revised and updated the manuscript. The document now contains a chapter in which he is strongly critical of some charities he has encountered. In one particular case, he criticises a person working for a large, well-known charity, accusing said person of being dishonest and lying both to him and about him. He sums up by saying that "One can put no faith into any statement issued by anyone associated with the <charity>." Further on in the chapter he goes on to criticise another charity, likening their uncompromising stance in the way they operate "to that prevalent towards people in Nazi Germany under Hitler".

To be honest, I am disturbed by this last chapter; but the book in general has some very good and astute observations that I think warrant publication and circulation. If I tell my acquaintance that I will only publish the document if he removes the final chapter I am effectively censoring his work. At the same time, I in no way share or endorse his view/opinion. So, my question is, is it enough for me to put something along the lines of the below on the ‘copyright’ page of the book to distance myself from the content?

“Due notice is hereby given that <my website name> acts only in the capacity of publisher and online distributor of this work. Views expressed in this text are those of the author and are neither endorsed by, nor represent those held by, the publisher <my website name> and/or associates.”

I guess what I'm really after knowing is whether, if any of the people/companies criticised in this book were to consider the text libellous, the legal responsibility falls with the author, publisher or both? In terms of the accuracy of the account, I only have this side. He generally strikes me as an honest man and I have no cause to consider him to have falsified and/or embellished his accounts. He may have evidence for all this, but my suspicion is it would be his word against theirs. I will, of course, raise my concerns with him over this, but I wanted to have an idea of any potential legal ramifications before I do.

Any advice would be gratefully received.
Cheers,
Marc.

[EXC]

Re: Libel in publishing

How is the book being distributed via your website? In other words can it actually be viewed on your website or are copies available to buy through it?

[mbaldw]

Re: Libel in publishing

Hi EXC, thanks for the reply. Apologies, I should've clarified that. I am making the book available for download (as a stand-alone PDF file) via my website free of charge.

Cheers,
Marc.

[EXC]

Re: Libel in publishing

Ok second question, what type of website is it and in particular does it have any user generated content?

[mbaldw]

Re: Libel in publishing

Hi EXC. The website is my personal website (www.wildlifeonline.me.uk) and all the content is generated by myself. Some content from the book is included on the site, but in the form of short sections of text, presented in quotation marks, giving statements of observations on animal behaviour, included with the author's consent; not any of the accusations.

Cheers,
Marc.

[EXC]

Re: Libel in publishing

Ok thanks.

The reason I asked is that section 5 of the Defamation Act 2013 provides a good defence to website operators if a defamation complaint concerns user generated content, as long as the operator follows the procedures laid down by the Act when dealing with a complaint. We use it all the time lol.

The question is, does a book that's not written by the operator which is downloadable from the operator's website amount to user generated content, and I don't know the answer. Perhaps my overworked colleague [MENTION=6]Amethyst[/MENTION] does?

If not then it might be that you are the publisher of the book - a subject I'm not too clued up on I'm afraid.

Rather than looking at the legislation itself the best guide to how section 5 works is the first dozen or so paragraphs here http://www.publications.parliament.u...13111956000130

I'm just wondering if you can tailor the availability of the book on your site so it's presented as user generated content and so benefit from the protection of section 5.

Nice website by the way - have bookmarked it already!

[Amethyst]

Re: Libel in publishing

It isn't user generated as it is being placed on the website by the OP, specifically to make it available for download. That would make the OP a primary publisher and held liable if the statements in the book are defamatory.

The disclaimer would have no effect I'm afraid.

It doesn't sound like you would be willing to stand by the accusations made in the book so I suggest you tell the author to change it, evidence its truth or don't publish it.

It does also depend on what is written, whether the company (charity) or person is indentified, and whether it is presented as opinion or fact. It is harder for the company (charity) as they have to prove serious financial loss resulting from the statements made, rather than purely reputational damage, but from what you have said, it wouldn't protect you against a claim from the individual named.

[mbaldw]

Re: Libel in publishing

Thank you EXC and Amethyst. Charities are named and a couple of people are named specifically in relation to events. The criticism is presented, in my opinion, as fact. I will take your advice and ask him to remove that chapter.

Cheers,
Marc.

p.s. Glad you like the website, EXC. It's very much a work in progress, but keeps me out of trouble.

[Amethyst]

Re: Libel in publishing

I think that is wise, go with your gut, if you don't feel comfortable with it being published under your name even before you publish it then you really don't want to find yourself defending a defamation action.

I have come across your website a few times, lots of work has gone into it, so really not worth risking losing it over a few dodgy comments someone else has made.

[mbaldw]

Re: Libel in publishing

Sound advice; thanks Amethyst. Given that defamation is a civil offence, one would hope things wouldn't escalate to the point of losing the site, but I have no intention of risking it either way.

Incidentally, your mention that the statement offers no protection got me thinking. I’m curious to know whether repeating such criticism is permitted if you’re directly quoting someone? I have seen many articles in which an author will say along the lines of ‘person X has been widely criticised for their beliefs on the subject and, in a recent autobiography, person Y likened their uncompromising stance to that of the Nazis’. Under such circumstances is the author still technically in breach of the Defamation Act because they’re perpetuating the criticism levied by person Y? Or is it clear enough that the views of person X are those of person Y, and are not those held by the author, and s/he isn’t considered to be defaming person Y?

Cheers,
Marc.

[dan_1207]

Re: Libel in publishing

Your best bet is to draft a publishing agreement with the author. Use something like the below:

The Author shall indemnify and hold the Publisher harmless against all liabilities, costs, expenses, damages and losses (including but not limited to any direct, indirect or consequential losses, loss of profit, loss of reputation and all interest, penalties and legal costs (calculated on a full indemnity basis) and all other reasonable professional costs and expenses) suffered or incurred by the Publisher arising out of or in connection with any breach of the warranties. At the request of the Publisher and at the Author's own expense, it shall provide all reasonable assistance to enable the Publisher to resist any claim, action or proceedings brought against the Publisher as a consequence of that breach.

This indemnity shall [apply whether or not the Publisher has been negligent or at fault OR not cover the Publisher to the extent that a claim under it results from the Publisher's negligence or wilful misconduct].

[PAWS]

Re: Libel in publishing

As Amethyst stated above, you do not seem to be totally convinced that the comments made by the author are defensible. It is also true that the disclaimer is not worth writing. If you publish then you are liable for the content and comments being available for all and sundry to read. You can tap-dance for hours around the difference between hard copy and online publishing but the safest route is to cover your ‘a**e’. HOWEVER……IF …….Your Author can prove the statements he is making are true or if he has witnesses, hard evidence etc. to back up the accusations made then I would suggest you both have a long hard chat and perhaps consider sticking your neck out.
Skulduggery within charities is despicable and a lot more common than we think. If it were not for brave authors and investigative journalists many now famous scandals would never be revealed and many corrupt people would still be in a position of trust. If you do not want to risk being sued even if the evidence to support the claims can be produced then that is fair enough but do think about it.
I know you do not have the flash legal team and financial resources to say ‘publish and be damned’ but if you do think you have enough evidence to fight a libel case then I would urge you to think about going for it or at least investigating the issue to see if evidence of wrong doing could be obtained.
Px