Certain online communication practices, including bestowing unwanted attention or offensive material on another, may constitute discrimination or harassment under discrimination and workplace relations law.

Repeated email contact, chat room messages or posting messages to social networking sites such as Facebook pages with the intention of causing psychological harm or arousing in the recipient a reasonable fear for their safety (or that of others) may constitute the offence of stalking, punishable by fine or imprisonment.

For further information on workplace relations and discrimination law generally see: Chapter 17 Discrimination.

Material that denigrates a particular group of people may be prohibited under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth). The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) assesses this type of content. Complaints of racial vilification have been upheld against the publishers of online content. In Jones v Toben [2002] FCA 1150 the Federal Court upheld a decision of the AHRC, which found that the Respondent had engaged in unlawful conduct by publishing on a website material that vilified Jews. 

This decision has been applied in later cases, for instance Silberberg v The Builders Collective of Australia Inc. [2007] FCA 1512. Although the posters of the offensive content were found liable, the website host was found to be not liable, because the failure to remove offensive content, despite having knowledge of it, was not necessarily connected to race.

For information on how to complain call the AHRC on 1300 656 419 or go to www.humanrights.gov.au.

In Victoria, the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 (Vic) (RRT Act) specifically covers electronic communications, including email. Complaints can be made to the Victorian Equal Opportunity & Human Rights Commission by going to its website at www.equalopportunitycommission.vic.gov.au and lodging a form. Information and assistance can be provided by calling 1300 891 848 or TTY 1300 152 494, or emailing to complaints@veohrc.vic.gov.au.

Cybersquatting describes the situation where a person registers domain names in which they have no legitimate interest, with a view to obtaining a profit from those with a genuine interest in the name. There is no specific anti-cyber squatting legislation in Australia, but such actions may constitute trademark infringement, passing off or breach of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) ("TPA").

Australian law currently operates on the basis that domain names are a licence, held by the registrant under a contract with the authority in charge of managing and registering domain names. This means that domain names are not owned but are contractual rights that are subject to terms and conditions as stipulated in the agreement for registration. The policy of the Australian Domain Name Administrator (auDA) (the regulator of the .au domain administration) states that:

2.1 There are no proprietary rights in a domain name. A registrant does not "own" their domain name, instead they hold a licence to use the domain name for a specified period of time and subject to the licence terms and conditions.

2.2 Because the registrant does not have a proprietary right in the domain name, it is not legally possible for the registrant to "sell" the domain name. By offering to sell their domain name to another party, the registrant is in breach of the Registrant Agreement.

Domain names are licensed on a "first come, first served basis". The current policy provides for .com.au names to:

exactly match, or be an acronym or abbreviation of the registrant's company or trading name, organisation or association name or trademark; or be otherwise closely and substantially connected to the registrant.

For further information on the registration of domain names go to the auDA site at www.auda.org.au.

Case authority exists that holding registration of a domain name may not constitute control over the website content. This is relevant, for example, when determining whether a party has power to publish corrective notices on a website. See: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Dynacast (Int) Pty Ltd(formerly Phoneflasher.com Pty Ltd) (unreported, FCA, Finn J, 7–8 August 2006, 26 March 2007).

Domain name disputes are commonly dealt with according to Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), which is regarded as a cheaper and simpler dispute resolution regime than court litigation. At an international level the policy is implemented by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Domain name disputes at the .au level are dealt with according to auDRP, which is the dispute resolution policy of auDA, a non-profit Australian company with the responsibility of formulating and administering policy in relation to .au name space.

Disputes are dealt with by independent arbitration services that have been accredited to ICANN. These include: The World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO); The National Arbitration Forum (NAF); The Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre (ADNDRC); and CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution.

The Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) imposes information privacy principles (IPPs) on the federal public sector and on private sector organisations. The principles set the minimum standards for the collection and handling of personal information by businesses and other private sector organisations. There is a current exemption for small business and for media organisations acting "in the course of journalism". The IPPs are relevant, for example, when collecting personal information from contributors to an online forum.

Providing a privacy policy for your website as well as terms and conditions of use are the mechanisms commonly used to manage the various legal risks associated with online publishing. For further information on privacy laws see: Chapter 21*5 Privacy Rights.

Internet dumping (also known as "modem jacking") is the practice of switching a user from their current ISP to a premium rate telephone number without their knowledge or consent. Internet dumping can occur when certain websites are accessed. Such a practice is likely to breach the TPA, or various state Fair Trading Acts, and may also be a breach of the customer's ISP contract.

If the ISP cannot resolve a complaint concerning internet dumping or an aspect of the ISP service, complaints can be made to the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman tel: 1800 062 058 (free call) or online at www.tio.com.au.

Spam is a generic term used to describe unsolicited commercial electronic messaging generally delivered by SMS or email (electronic junk mail). The Spam Act 2003 (Cth) came into effect on 10 April 2004 and requires that spam can only be sent with consent, although consent can be reasonably inferred from a business relationship. Subsequent commercial messages must include an "unsubscribe" facility.

Phishing is a form of identity theft where fake emails and websites, designed to look like legitimate businesses, financial institutions and government agencies are used to deceive internet users into disclosing their bank and financial account information or other personal details. More information about spam, including making complaints about spam and phishing, can be obtained from the ACMA (see: "Further information" below).