Inforrm is taking a Winter Break

24 12 2012

winter-break-colorThe Inforrm blog will be taking a short winter break again this year to allow our editorial team to relax.  We will have a few “seasonal” posts over the next fortnight – in particular Jude Townend’s “Media Law Review of the Year” and the eagerly awaited and hotly contested “Inforrm 2012 Quiz” – but normal service will not be resumed until the second week in January 2013.

This has been another remarkable year for media law – dominated by the Leveson Inquiry and Report but with several high profile libel trials.  Inforrm has had 600,000 page views this year – and has again, broken a number of “media law exclusives” – largely as a result of the encyclopedic legal knowledge of Benjamin Pell.

Many thanks to all our readers for following the blog and for the many positive comments we have had (and the constructive negative ones).  Thanks also to everyone who has written for the blog in the past year – in particular to Jude Townend (who has taken on the serious burden of producing the weekly round up) and Brian Cathcart (whose incisive Leveson related posts have been widely read).

As we have said many times before, Inforrm is intended to be a forum for debate and we welcome contributions from all points of view about issues concerning “media and law”.  We can be contacted via the email address on the home page.

The most popular posts made in 2012 were:

La Regina Nuda and Italian Privacy Law – Athalie Matthews and Giacomo Parmigiani

News: Tulisa “Sex Tape”, false privacy turns into true privacy

The BBC, Lord McAlpine and Libel Law

Case Law: Von Hannover v Germany (No.2) – Unclear clarification and unappreciated margins – Kirsten Sjøvoll

The Mail and the naked prince – Brian Cathcart

Leveson and Legality: implementation of the Report would not be Illegal – Hugh Tomlinson QC

A load of hype? The phone hacking scandal may be bigger than we thought – Brian Cathcart

News: Tulisa “Sex tape”, further hearing – Ex-lover denies leaking tape

Case Law: Růžový Panter, OS v Czech Republic: Anti-Corruption NGO defamation case, no violation of Article 10

What the Defamation Bill means for the internet – Graham Smith

About these ads

Actions

Information

One response

24 12 2012
Alan Taylor

Thank you so much for your wonderful service,

Alan Taylor

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,022 other followers

%d bloggers like this: