Australia's top court gave a preliminary ruling in the case of Gutnick versus Dow Jones last December. Within hours, news feeds were buzzing and some were predicting the end of the free press as Western countries know it.
The fuss was understandable. The highest court of a leading jurisdiction had ruled for the first time on the thorny issue of where a media organisation can be sued for defamation in a news item uploaded to a Web server in one country and read in another.
The site attracts a handful of paying subscribers in Australia, whereas the print version has a circulation of about 300,000 in the US.
Mr Gutnick is an Australian and lives in Australia, although he has a home in the US and business interests there. He alleged the article tarnished his reputation in Australia and is seeking damages to compensate him.
Those familiar with the defamation game may speculate that Mr Gutnick is really suing to score points against the company in the US but prefers the 'pro-plaintiff' defamation law in Australia to that in the US, where the constitutional right to free speech makes it difficult for public figures to win libel cases.
