Saturday, March 23, 2019
Call For Legal Help: 0800 612 7211

via Internet Law Experts | Online Reputation and Videos 

Having your reputation tarnished all over the internet is bad. But having your reputation destroyed with an online video is absolutely devastating.

Since taking over You Tube, Google appears to be on a mission to turn the internet into a multimedia medium and so are the other major search engines. It is believed that Google uses positive discrimination in order to encourage the use of video on the internet and as a result, it gives priority to video results which contain the searched keywords as well as to web pages which contain videos.

This means that online videos could be used as an explosive weapon by those who wish to harm your online reputation.  Online videos can be optimized to obtain good placements without the search engines in exactly the same way that optimisation is done for a web page. In fact, some argue it is much easier to obtain high places in the search engines with videos than with web pages. At the moment, online videos remain a major reputational weakness for many businesses. But this weakness can be turned into strength very quickly.

You can create a relatively inexpensive yet highly effective reputational defence shield by…Read NOW the full article on Internet Lawyer website

 
 

Posted by London Internet Lawyers

How Can I Remove Defamatory Websites

In the past few weeks we removed over 40 defamatory websites, which up until then, devastated our clients’ reputation.

We removed a vast number of defamatory videos from You Tube and we managed to remove a popular, yet defamatory article against a successful businessman from a national news website.

We sought and won injunctions against YouTube, Google Inc, Firefox and other internet giants around the world and successfully enforced them all in the UK, the USA, Canada and other countries.

We gave one decent, hard-working online retailer his business back following savage online reputation attacks against him and his company by competitors.

We advised a client who owns an international franchise company on how to deal with online attacks by a former employee. These constant attacks were estimated to have cost the company in excess of £300,000!

 
We have also helped the owners of a national services company to form their first ever online reputation strategy following a devastating online reputation attack against them by both a competitor and a former employee, which cost them their biggest contact.

Last month, we brought solutions to an ever growing number of vulnerable people following online reputation attacks against them. We devised creative and cost effective solutions. Some of these individuals thought that it would cost them a fortune to stop these online attacks on their reputation, but pleasantly enough for them, many of them were completely surprised.
The full solution to their online reputation problem was handed to them during an initial consultation, which meant that they needed not spend any money with us, save for their investment of £93 in the initial consultation.

Other individuals saw their problem quickly disappearing following a well drafted and extremely effective letter (sometimes 2), which we sent on their behalf.
Other individuals, who were on the verge of giving up and who came to us with serious online reputation problems, sometimes following years of attacks on their reputation online, finally found that no reputation issue, as big as it might be, is beyond our competence.

But we also brought to them solutions for any future problems. To prevent the problem from repeating itself, we created a unique tool that gives them early alerts of any posts about them on the internet.

It brings any internet posts that carry yours or your company’s name, directly to the desk of our highly experienced legal team, and in real-time.
The material then undergoes an initial assessment and then if necessary, is acted upon.
We do this all for you with no hassle or inconvenience to you. Should the material posted be suspected to be harmful to your reputation we take swift action to contain the problem and often to make it completely  disappear.

Follow this link to learn more about the exclusive our reputation management tools. 

http://www.internetlawcentre.co.uk

We have solutions to almost all online reputation problems. Some of these solutions are fast, others take more time to implement. But what we are sure about is that you will get results (and more quickly), if you use people who are hugely experienced in this very delicate areas of law and business.

We are ready to take on your online reputation problem.

Internet Lawyers

 
 

Internet Lawyers: Are Website Hosts Responsible For Defamatory Comments Posted On Their Websites?
Once something defamatory is published against you or against your company, website operators become a crucial point of call in the search for who may be responsible for the original publication of the defamatory material, and also key to getting the article or site removed. There is therefore a very powerful argument to conclude that every website operator that has received a…..Read Full Blog on Internet Lawyer‘s Internet Law Experts Solicitors website
via Internet Lawyers: Are Website Hosts Responsible For Defamatory Comments Posted On Their Websites? | Internet Law.

Internet Law Experts: Who Can I Sue for Online Defamation?

Because under English law legal action is possible against all intervening persons who are responsible for repeating, publishing or otherwise circulating the defamation, Internet Service Providers such as Virgin Media, AOL or BT run the risk of being regarded as the publishers of libellous remarks, originated by another person, but published by them in one of their hosted websites or forums.

A person who has been defamed online may choose whether to sue the original defamer, or the repeat publisher, or both. In reality many would rather sue the party with the deepest pockets, usually the Internet Service Provider, rather than the original author who might be penniless. Internet Service Provider’s liability appears to be almost unlimited because the courts have so far rejected claims them that a defence of ‘innocent dissemination’ should be available to them because they have no effective control over the material they re-distribute.

The Defamation Act 1996 attempted to provide Internet Service Providers in the UK with an opportunity to limit their liability. However, this law turned out to be very confusing and unclear which means that Internet Service Providers in England are still extremely vulnerable to be sued for defamation. Furthermore, because in cases of internet defamation there is normally a choice of jurisdictions available to the aggrieved party it is very possible for the defamed person to choose to take legal action in a jurisdiction other than the UK, where the defamation law is less favourable to the Internet Service Providers.

Yair Cohen

Internet Law Expert: What Is The Law On Defamation And How Can I Prove Defamation Of Character | Internet Law |

In response to the many requests by our friends and colleagues, I have now put together a short article explaining in simple language the law on defamation of character.

Basically, the purpose of the law surrounding defamation of character is to protect an individual’s reputation. As is the case with most areas of law, there is a delicate balance, which must be achieved between a person’s reputation on the one hand and another’s right to speak their mind.

For a defamation claim to succeed in England, three elements first need to be made out:

 

Read full article on Internet Lawyer’s website.

 

via Internet Law Expert: What Is The Law On Defamation And How Can I Prove Defamation Of Character | Internet Law |

RELATED ARTICLES

Online Defamation – Protecting Online Reputation

By Yair Cohen  – Internet Law Expert

‘A good reputation is worth more than gold or silver’

Age old wisdom that still rings true today. Reputation is everything. And yet the spreading of a bad reputation will cost you gold and silver, and lots of it!Internet defamation experts

There’s no doubt about it, the internet has revolutionised the way businesses generate custom; widening marketing potential, broadening client resource bases and in a nutshell, spreading the (good) word! For this reason, keeping tabs on your business online reputation cannot be prioritised highly enough. This has to include having measures at your disposal to guard off any trace of negativity. Why? Because the success of your business depends on it!

No doubt, having effective strategies in place is the key. Such strategies that I recomend as an internet lawyer  include preventative measures ensuring no defamation takes place, as well as quite literally setting all systems blazing the minute you get wind of any. Implementing reputation alarms, applying the pressure to the right people to remove the defamatory material, countering the negative material with good, and fighting for financial pay outs are all measures we are here to help you readily adopt to neutralise the damage caused, and build you up once again.

My Reputation Alarm is only one tool among many in your business arsenal. It helps to detect and alert but it must be accompanied by other measures which are ultimately aimed towards the goal of bringing you more business so that you can become more prosperous.

Click here for more free tips from internet lawyer, Yair Cohen on how to manage your online reputation.

Internet Lawyers: Bad News For Record Companies� Internet Law Legal Briefings.

The Irish High Court has ruled that the country’s laws forbid Internet service providers from suspending access to alleged file-swappers. The ruling was announced following a law suit by a local Internet Service Provider, UPC. The Irish Recorded Music Association previously sought a Court order to force UPC to hand over personal details of those the Association, which represents the major local record labels in Ireland, suspected of file….Read more�from Internet lawyers

Internet Law ExpertYou have to be careful with the way you are sending emails to bulk recipients. By sending it from your outlook you are running the risk that all your emails will be blacklisted, which I can tell you is a complete nightmare to experience and then fix.

Once you are suspected of sending bulk email, your email address will be blacklisted by one of a number of companies whose job is to locate ‘spammers’ and stop them from sending emails altogether. Once you get blacklisted by one company, others will follow suit.

You might then find that you are unable to send emails to any AOL, Hotmail, Google Mail, BT mail and many more. Any email sent will bounce back and will not be delivered to its intended recipient. Once blocked, it could take days to fix the problem. In the meantime, your customers will not be able to receive emails from you. A total nightmare.

If you find that your emails are bouncing back, you will need to get an IT expert to fix the problem and in some extreme cases use Internet Lawyers to take legal action. Whichever way you look at it, it is not going to be cheap. If you were to send useful information to your customers, always use a commercial programme such as Aweber (about £10 a month) or something similar where your bulk emails are being sent from an external server without any risk of your own domain being blacklisted. A programme such as Aweber will also allow recipients of your email to easily unsubscribe, making sure that your emails are only received by those who wish to receive them.

You can find here more free tips on Internet Law

Speak soon,

Yair Cohen

Internet Lawyer

Click here for instant social media legal advice

How To Best Deal With Online Defamation

Everyone needs to have a few blogs or ‘mini websites’ on the back burner. It is like having an army of loyal soldiers, all well trained and ready to fight the enemy upon demand. These mini websites can be activated with positive content about your company as soon as you feel that a reputation attack is imminent. By populating these mini websites you will help to push any negative web pages down the search engines. Because it could take weeks and sometimes months for web pages to be indexed by the search engines, as an internet defamation lawyer I always advise to have these blogs, or mini websites already prepared, indexed and ready to go on demand. Speak to your internet people today and ask them to create a few basic websites for you straight away, just in case….. 

Do you have a defamation problem question?

Get in touch with Internet Law Expert

Behind the music: Will the House of Lords block the Digital Economy Act?

via The Guardian

An interesting visit to Westminster suggests issues of filesharing and copyright are very much on the House of Lords’ agenda.

Last week I had tea with Lord Lucas in the House of Lords (I know – whodathought?). He wanted to have a chat about what the Lords could do to help artists and music creators. As soon as we sat down, he brought up the Digital Economy Act, a subject that had been discussed at length during the Westminster eForum, which he attended, a few days earlier. It was the part pertaining to the possible temporary disconnection of persistent illegal downloaders that had created heated discussions among indie labels and ISPs. “It’s dead in the water,” he proclaimed. “There’s no way we will alienate our voters and punish individuals.”

A source tells me that there’s a very specific reason why the Lords are so interested in the DEA – the plan is a push for them having the right to review every single piece of legislation passed in parliament. No wonder it appeared Lucas had been heavily lobbied by the ISPs. He also had very little love for the major labels, though he conceded he’d never met any of them. “They thought they had it all sewn up since they had Mandelson on board,” he said, with disdain. “Now that it’s passed they don’t seem interested in talking to us.”

So I asked him what he proposed to do, if, indeed, he was interested in helping artists. Lucas said the music industryshould give consumers what they want. “What, like free, unlimited music?” I asked. “They need to make a deal with the ISPs. Or at least with one of them, and the others will follow,” he replied, pointing to the stalled negotiations with Virgin Media. I’ve said before that I support such a deal  and, unlike Lucas, I have talked to major labels. Universal’s head of digital, Francis Keeling, blamed the other record labels for being unreasonable, pointing out that Universal was first on board for Virgin Media’s “unlimited” music service. I replied that maybe Universal had taken such a big slice of the pie that there was little left for the other labels to share. “It wouldn’t be in Virgin’s interest to give less advantageous deals to other labels,” said Keeling. Independent labels, in particular, would disagree with that statement.

I suggested to Lucas that there should be a pan-European collection society, both for artists and songwriters, that negotiates deals and licences music services – a one-stop shop, if you will – pointing out that the majority of artists and songwriters want licensing to be simpler and to be paid fairly. As an example, I voiced my dismay with Google’s YouTube deal with PRS. Surprisingly, since he’s a conservative and I was under the impression that they oppose government intervention, Lucas said he had no problem with reining in Google and he would support an EU directive of a minimum rate for music streaming (PRS has one, by the way, but Google refuses to pay it). “If they don’t pay, they won’t be allowed to operate,” he proposed, adding that he’d be happy to break their – and iTunes’ – dominance of the music industry.

At the eForum, the head of the Association of Independent  Music, Alison Wenham, spoke of the frustration indie labels felt when they released a record and the first six pages of Google search results would show illegal downloading sites, before the first legal one showed up on page seven. Lucas suggested regulations that would prevent that from happening. “We should only target the illegal filesharing sites that make a profit,” he said, adding that the sites where people share with friends should not be disallowed. That’s a bit of a muddy theory, I’d say, as one could argue what constitutes “a friend”. If it’s a friend, you wouldn’t need a site to share your music – you could just go over to their house, or send it in an email.

Lucas concluded that we need copyright reform. He doesn’t want any restrictions on usage, but obligatory remuneration – an impressive idea, but almost utopian in its implementation. Like so many who present a panacea to the music industry, he fell slightly short in his understanding of it. For example, he was under the impression that different songs were paid at different rates by the PRS, according to their genre and popularity. I explained that the composers of a popular song only get paid more because it gets played more.

Yet, I applaud him for reaching out to the artist community to learn more about what they want. Soon he may even get another peer who is one. Rumours are – and I’d say they’re not completely unsubstantiated – that Feargal Sharkey, the former frontman of the Undertones, is in line for a peerage. As Sharkey is now the head of music industry umbrella organisation UK Music, what are the chances there will be some more heated discussions in the House of Lords on the implementation of the DEA?

 
 

Pages Removed

Articles Removed

Dedication

Years of Internet Law Experience