Defamed on YouTube

Whether you use YouTube yourself or not, the significance of the platform cannot be ignored.  The platform has in excess of 2 billion active monthly users and its content has great reach, not least because it is integrated to the Google search engine.

The law of defamation applies equally to YouTube as it does to more traditional forms of publication/broadcast.

When establishing a defamation claim it is generally immaterial whether a defendant has launched a deliberate attack on your reputation, broadcast something in anger or innocently repeated a defamatory statement made by a third party.  If a YouTube video is viewed and serious reputational damage has been suffered then you can normally assert a claim for libel.

Defamation is not simply a numbers game, but generally the more a YouTube video is viewed the greater the likelihood of reputational damage.  Damage may increase further, and additional claims arise, if the defamatory content is rebroadcast elsewhere.  Conversely, if the level of viewers is low then a claim for libel may fail unless it can be established on evidence that the posting has caused or is likely to cause serious reputational harm (this is a requirement of any defamation claim under section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013).

The normal libel defences apply to YouTube defamation claims.  For example, the defence of truth, honest opinion, publication on a matter of public interest (sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Defamation Act 2013). These defences are complicated and often misunderstood.  Prospective claimants or defendants should generally seek specialist legal advice.

Yes, we act for claimants and defendants.  If you are a YouTuber creator and you have been accused of defamation, we can advise and represent you.

The remedies we can seek on your behalf include: removal, an apology/clarification, damages/compensation, and an undertaking (promise) not to repeat.  In matters that go to court we can seek damages and an injunction.  On occasions, a statement can be made in open court putting the record straight.

In some instances, YouTube creators will be anonymous or pseudonymous (i.e. they will use an alias). We can advise you on your options, including asking YouTube to remove the offending content or the scope for seeking a type of court order known as a Norwich Pharmacal Order requiring the disclosure of information which might identify the creator.  Over the years we have obtained numerous orders against Google requiring the disclosure of information about accountholders.

If a defendant is based outside the UK it may be necessary or preferable (for legal and/or practical reasons) to engage lawyers in the jurisdiction where the defendant is based.  This will be case-specific.  If instructed, we will talk you through the relevant issues with you.

We can assist you with asserting claims for the misuse of private information, breach of confidence and breach of data protection rights under the UK General Data Protection Regulation (‘UK GDPR’) and Data Protection Act 2018.

We can normally assert a claim on behalf of your children.  Children are entitled to a greater level of privacy than adults.

If we believe the legal threshold for harassment is met, we can assert a claim for harassment on your behalf.  The Court has the power to award damages (compensation) for distress/injury to feelings and impose an injunction.  In some circumstances, harassment may also give rise to criminal liability.

In practice libel claims against platforms are rare, but they are theoretically possible.  We acted for the claimant/appellant in Tamiz v Google Inc [2013] EWCA Civ 68, which is the only time the Court of Appeal considered the liability of online platforms for libel.  The Court held that Google Inc could be liable as publisher at common law in relation to its Blogger platform after it had been placed on notice of offending content and a reasonable amount of time had passed.  Our summary of the judgment can be found here.  There is now a statutory defence in libel for intermediaries where the identity of the original publisher/broadcaster is known (section 10 of the Defamation Act 2013).  The position regarding YouTube’s potential liability for misuse of private information, breach of data protection legislation or harassment has yet to be determined by the English courts.

• To learn more about how we can help you bring a defamation claim click here to read our Defamation FAQs.