Lord Chancellor's department goes to ground over banned Web site
Own goal leaves legal eagles' feathers ruffled
The Web site closed down after its ISP had been warned by the Lord Chancellor's department of its "offensive" material has proliferated on the Internet following media attention. The site, run by James Hulbert, accused five judges of acting corruptly. Following the site's removal, however, several parties, including Hulbert, mirrored it on their own servers, greatly increasing exposure. However, despite The Register's attempts to allow the Lord Chancellor's department to comment on its "own goal", a senior representative refused to acknowledge that the situation had changed - at one point denying that repetition of libel was itself an offence.* Incredibly, the Lord Chancellor's department did not believe the multiplication of the site would increase the degree to which the accusations entered the public domain (thereby going against the wording of the law itself). Not content with this logical paradox, the representative then informed The Register the matter was not of public interest. The Register believes that the use of judiciary powers to stifle an individual's opinions is very much in the public interest. Are we wrong? Put your comments to us. ® * Further information: Given the Lord Chancellor's department's assertion that reporting Hulbert's comments is not actually a repetition of libel, The Register now feels confident enough to point you in the direction of some of the allegations.
Sponsored: RAID: End of an era?