On 15/11/2007, Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)fairpoint.net> wrote:
From our article on the Rehabilitation of Offenders
Act of 1974:
Rehabilitation Act and actions for libel under British law
According to Law and the Media, a reference work relating to British media
law, if a person can prove that the details of a spent conviction were
published with malice, then the publisher may be subject to libel damages
regardless of whether the details were true or not. This applies where the
publisher is relying on a defence of qualified privilege or justification.
I'm not sure how well you would do trying to argue that a wikipedia
editor gets qualified privilege. Somehow I doubt you would get very
far.
--
geni