When Free Speech is Costly

When Free Speech is Costly

The cost to victims of internet libel and harassment is incalculable; And, it is Congress’ doing…

“And so we live in a universe of new media with phenomenal opportunities for worldwide communications and research — but populated by volunteer vandals with poison-pen intellects. Congress has enabled them and protects them”

Renowned Journalist John Seigenthaler

Define:Freedom of Speech

Freedom of speech is being able to speak freely without censorship. The right to freedom of speech is guaranteed under international law through numerous human rights instruments, notably under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights; notwithstanding, implementation remains lacking in many countries. The synonymous term freedom of expression is sometimes preferred, since the right is not confined to verbal speech but is understood to protect any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used.


Rexxfield embraces and encourages the global application of freedom of speech while protecting and restoring the innocent victims of the abuse thereof, specifically those who have been injured through deceptive, false and defamatory assertions in the form of slander and libel; which are generally not protected forms of free speech.

Freedom of Speech in Practice

4 Minute VideoSection 230 see the communications decency act, state-sponsored cyber terrorism In practice, the right to freedom of speech is not absolute in any country, although the degree of freedom varies greatly. Developed nations also have varying approaches to balance freedom with order. For instance, the United States First Amendment theoretically grants absolute freedom, placing the burden upon the state to demonstrate when (if) a limitation of this freedom is necessary. In almost all liberal democracies, it is generally recognized that restrictions should be the exception and free expression the rule; nevertheless, compliance with this principle is often lacking.

United States federal law opens the door to Free Speech abuse and perpetuation thereof

Section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act is probably the single greatest step backwards for the original intent of the first amendment. This is so because it relates to free speech over the Internet allowing 24/7 real time access to almost limitless and unfiltered information to equally numerous people. The act is controversial because several courts have interpreted it as providing complete immunity for Internet service and content providers with regard to the torts committed by their users over their systems. Section 230 “creates a federal immunity to any cause of action that would make service providers liable for information originating with a third-party user of the service.” [Reference]
Many criticize Section 230 for leaving victims with no hope of relief where the true libelers cannot be identified or are judgment proof. Giants such as major search engines can as a result allow a person or business to be ruined at every level by ignoring the plight of innocent victims targeted by libelers, regardless of the evidence supporting the removal request.
Rexxfield can assist in the positive identification of cowards who veil their poisonous words behind a shield of anonymity. More….

Freedom of Speech in Other Nations

Thankfully the Section 230(c) license given to ISPs to disseminate and perpetuate online libel does not extend beyond the USA borders. However, this doesn’t stop non-US internet users from accessing illegal and unprotected speech.
Request a more information…..