En revanche, dans l'affaire Print Zeitungsverlag GmbH c. Autriche (no 26547/07, arrêt rendu le 10 octobre 2013, soit le même jour que l'arrêt de chambre dans l'affaire Delfi), la Cour a dit que l'octroi d'une somme de 2 000 euros (EUR) en dédommagement de la publication d'une lettre dans la presse écrite était - et ce à juste titre - compatible avec sa jurisprudence antérieure[7].

Even accepting the domestic courts' qualification of the applicants' conduct as "disseminating" defamatory statements, the applicant's liability is difficult to reconcile with the existing case-law according to which "punishment of a journalist for assisting in the dissemination of statements made by another person in an interview would seriously hamper the contribution of the press to discussion of matters of public interest and should not be envisaged unless there are particularly strong reasons for doing so" (see Jersild, cited above, § 35; Thoma v. Luxembourg, no. 38432/97, § 62, ECHR 2001-III; and, mutatis mutandis, Verlagsgruppe News GmbH v. Austria, no. 76918/01, § 31, 14 December 2006, Print Zeitungsverlag GmbH v. Austria, no. 26547/07, § 39, 10 October 2013; and Delfi AS, cited above, § 135).

The relevant criteria thus defined are: contribution to a debate of public interest, the degree of notoriety of the person affected, the subject of the news report, the prior conduct of the person concerned, the content, form and consequences of the publication, and, where appropriate, the circumstances in which the statement was made (see Print Zeitungsverlag GmbH v. Austria, no. 26547/07, § 33, 10 October 2013 and mutatis mutandis Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v. France [GC], no. 40454/07, § 93, 10 November 2015).

The relevant criteria thus defined are: contribution to a debate of public interest, the degree of notoriety of the person affected, the subject of the news report, the prior conduct of the person concerned, the content, form and consequences of the publication, and, where appropriate, the circumstances in which the statement was made (see Print Zeitungsverlag GmbH v. Austria, no. 26547/07, § 33, 10 October 2013 and, mutatis mutandis, Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v. France [GC], no. 40454/07, § 93, 10 November 2015).