A small scale catastrophe?

We have highlighted that the current drafting of “relevant publisher” for the purposes of the Leveson law risks capturing blogs and organisations like Big Brother Watch in a system of regulation never intended for them.

The Government’s amendment to the Crime and Courts Bill exempts “a person who publishes a small-scale blog” from the definition of “relevant publisher” is an attempt to deal with growing concern, as demonstrated by the 20 person signatory letter in Saturday’s Guardian.

Sadly the amendment offers no definition of what is “small scale” or how it relates to an organisation who publishes the blog in question, so the compromise arguably makes the situation worse. The first time an organisation is sued as being a relevant publisher would have to fight in court  to prove they are not – or risk facing exemplary damages. That could be a hefty legal bill and for small organisations a fight they might not be able to even consider, let alone see to the end.

While this is not to say that we are happy for large organisations to be regulated by the state – quite the opposite – we are deeply concerned that those who cannot afford the lawyers to fight the initial case of whether they are a “relevant publisher” would be caught up in the proposed system.

According to various sources the Government will use the coming weeks to consult with relevant people to move things forward. We hope they can find a way to produce legislation that doesn’t require people to risk bankruptcy to clear up poor Parliamentary drafting.