Answering this question first demands an explanation of what cyber defamation is. The Indian Penal Code (IPC) defines defamation as "statement or words which are published and calculated to expose any person to ridicule, contempt or hatred or which aim to injure the said person in his vocation, business, trade, profession or office, or which aim to cause him to be shunned or avoided in public and in society."

The important word here is 'published' which implies that, for a statement to be considered defamatory, it should be communicated to someone other than the person to whom it is addressed.

Though the Information Technology Act, 2000 does not specifically define defamation as an offence, it is clear that the definition of "publishing" is wide enough to include statements made on the Internet. The medium of publication is immaterial in cases involving defamation because, just as in the real world, everyone online has the right to reputation.

Online defamation is, in fact, the most dangerous because of the relatively low cost of setting up a site, the ability to disguise identities and ease with which uncensored information can reach with a limitless audience.

You can have a defamatory statement spread via a site, text message, email or discussion board, and get sued for it, too. Worse, you are guilty even if you have simply -- or even wrongly -- forwarded a defamatory email, since every subsequent "publication" is a fresh offence. Similarly, owners, administrators and coordinators of any such site will also become a party to the suit.

What about the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that host these pages? Can they also be held liable? Section 501 of the IPC states that "whoever prints any matter, knowing or having good reason to believe that such matter is defamatory, would be liable to imprisonment of two years, or fine, or both." This has been the bane of many publishers, who have been held liable for defamatory matter printed in their newspapers.

The IT Act, however, clarifies that though the ISPs would ordinarily be liable for the abuse of services provided by them, they may be excused if it is "proved that the offence or contravention was committed without their knowledge or that they had exercised all due diligence to prevent it." This is in keeping with global trends which hold that while ISPs should be encouraged to develop some kind of supervisory mechanism, due regard must also be given to the physical difficulties of censoring each and every statement on the Internet.

In India's first cyber defamation court hearing, Jogesh Kwatra, an employee of SMC Pneumatics (India) Pvt. Ltd., sent anonymous and highly derogatory emails to his employers and subsidiaries of the company around the world.

In a landmark order, Justice J D Kapoor of the Delhi High Court passed an ex-party ad-interim injunction prohibiting Kwatra from sending any further emails, and from publishing, transmitting or causing to be published any derogatory or defamatory information. The quantum of damages is yet to be decided.

Will this judgment open the gates for increased litigation on cyber defamation? Most Indian lawyers are not too hopeful, mainly because of difficulties of jurisdiction and lack of legal awareness amongst Net users in the country. For a start, most defamatory sites and mailing lists are cunningly uploaded from other countries, outside the jurisdiction of our courts, making punishment by Indian authorities a pipe dream.

Adding to this, digital tools like anonymous remailers strip electronic information of all identifying bits, making it impossible to fix any responsibility.

None of this, however, should be read as license to post statements about the neighbour you dislike, or forward nasty emails that rip your boss apart.

Should you feel the urge to, just keep Jogesh Kwatra in mind.