This is a site designed to make it easier to take the core of large published reports and allow anyone to comment on them.


23. In addition, there would be a need to consider whether online material that has been modified should be classified as a new publication. This issue was considered in relation to a website in the United States in Firth v State of New York19. This case concerned a report published at a press conference which was then placed on the internet the same day, but the claim was not filed for over a year. It was held that the limitation period ran from the time that the article was placed on the website, and that each “hit” on the website did not amount to a new publication. It was also held that unrelated modifications made to other parts of the site were irrelevant and did not create a new publication.

Email this to a friend.
Previous itemNext item.


A sound ruling, I would suggest.

I'd further suggest that modifications to the same page that don't affect the content are similarly irrelevant and should not be considered a new publication.

Posted by Owen Blacker on 2009-10-03 23:28:07.
Link. Report abuse to Back to the main document list


(You must give a valid email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)

We only allow the following html tags em strong blockquote p br. After posting, there may be a short delay before your comment appears on the site