Copied under Part VB, The following is an abstract from 'Please send in your feedback': It's a case of buyer and seller beware when it comes to eBay by Elise Ackerman. August 26-27, 2006 Courier Mail

eBay has built itself into the world's largest online marketplace because of trust created by feedback from users. A problem arises if a review is false. How does an internet company, such as eBay, separate unpleasant truths from defamatory lies? Most companies choose to let the courts decide.

Case Study: Kiel Sturm, a 23 year old computer programmer, said he immediately offered to return Eusebio Guerrero's money after Guerrero told him he did not think the $3 quartz stone he bought was real. Sturm said Guerrero, who did not respond to an email, refused.

Sturm was in the middles of about 20 auctions when Guerreo left the first nasty note about him on an eBay feedback forum on July20, 2005. "Not as advertised," the first note said. "Absolutely misrepresented." The note was followed by a string of accusations, most of them written in capital letters.

"THIS SELLER CANNOT BE TRUSTED. HE SELLS JUNK. BUYERS MUST BEWARE OF THIS SELLER."

Sturm immediately felt the effect of Guerrero's remarks immediately, as buyers fled his auctions. A Columbian emerald that had been appraised for thousands of dollars ended up selling for $10.50.

Sturm said that he had enjoyed his hobby of buying and selling gems on eBay. However, maintaining his reputation was crucial, he said, because buyers are afraid of counterfeits.

"People definitely check you out before they make a bid," Sturm said. "If you have anything that looks suspicious, they are not going to bid or they are not going to bid very much".

Sellers can also check out buyers. But Sturm said he was running so many auctions that he didn't check out feedback left about Guerrero, which might have raised a red flag, before he sold him the quartz and two other stones.

Afterwards it was too late. eBay will not remove feedback unless it receives a court order finding that the disputed feedback is "slanderous, libellous, defamatory or otherwise illegal".

Question 35

b) That the material can reasonably be taken as referring to the plaintiff the plaintiff does not have to be specifically named a person can be accidentally defamed apart from individuals, companies, unions, councils and others incorporated bodies can sue and be sued for defamation

Question 36

This element has/has not been proven?

Question 37

c) the publication of the defamatory material has taken place Publication includes printing, written words, spoken words, making gestures or signs, audio tape, video tape or other material to someone other than the plaintiff

Question 38

This element has/has not been proven?

Question 39

Conclusion: As all 3 conditions _________ been satisfied by the plaintiff's evidence, then the plaintiff_________

be successful in an action for defamation. If the plaintiff may be successful in a defamation action then there are a number of defences to consider________

Question 40

a. s__________ TRUE - That the material was both true and correct to the public benefit

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Question 41

b. s_________HONEST OPINION - That the material was not defamatory but a legitimate, honest and fair expression of opinion, not motivated by malice or spite.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Question 42

c. s_______ PRIVILEGE - That the alleged defamation took place in special circumstances such that the law will not find the defendant liable. Defence of absolute protection or qualified protection.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Question 43

d. s__________ A fair report in good faith for information of the public.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Question 44

e. s________ That the defamatory book or periodical was innocently sold.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Question 45

f. s_______________That the defamation was trivial so the plaintiff suffered little measurable harm, or that an apology was made.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If all three conditions of defamation have been satisfied and there are no defences the defendant can rely on then the plaintiff could seek the following remedies:

Remedies: Act: Defamation Act 2005 (Qld)

Question 46 Remedies available to the plaintiff include_________________ and _____________________.

Question 47 According to section ______________ there _____________ any mitigating factors to reduce damages.