It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Twitter users given legal warning in Britain

page: 1
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Twitter users given legal warning in Britain


phys.org

The Internet is not a law-free zone, the British government's top law officer warned Twitter users, adding that he would not hesitate to take action over offending posts.
Attorney General Dominic Grieve spoke out following a series of high-profile court cases involving postings made on the micro-blogging site.
"If somebody goes down to the pub with printed sheets of paper and hands it out, that's no different than if somebody goes and and does a tweet," Grieve told BBC radio.
(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Fabrice Muamba: Racist Twitter user jailed for 56 days (Right or Wrong)




posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:31 AM
link   
There was already some precedent warnings:
- A student who mocked English Premier League footballer Fabrice Muamba on Twitter after he collapsed on the pitch with a heart attack in March was jailed for 56 days after admitting a racially aggravated public order offence.

- Some 17 arrests have been made in connection with the alleged naming on Twitter of the woman that Wales footballer Ched Evans was last month convicted of raping.

- In March, former New Zealand cricketer Chris Cairns won a libel action against ex-Indian Premier League chairman Lalit Modi in the first libel action heard in England against a post on Twitter.

- Judge David Bean dismissed match-fixing allegations levelled against the cricketer, leaving Modi facing a bill of more than £500,000 ($800,000).

phys.org
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:35 AM
link   
no free speech on twitter then... what one finds offensive another might not... time to get rid of my twitter i think



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:40 AM
link   
Pretty scary.

Most ATS members could be arrested.

I wonder how far they can go back to look. Will the stuff we post today and in the past be used against us in the future?



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by elevenaugust
 


scary. how can you regulate a 140 character profile post? if i want to go on twitter and spew libelous garbage, that's my choice. just like it's everybody else's choice to follow me or not. maybe if there was clear evidence that your post led to violence or crime, then MAYBE this could be justified. but honestly, I feel like law enforcement has better things to spend the public's money on than cruising twitter for sh#t-talkers. even in Britain!



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
There is no such thing as free speech, not even here on ATS. There are rules everywhere we go and if we decide to break those rules (as many of us do every day) then we should be prepared to accept the consequences.

It's not like we're all 5 years old after all, so surly we should be capable of censoring ourselves as and when required? And by doing so, we could have more constructive conversations that don't revolve around sensationalism and rumour mongering.

Also, as my dearly departed mother used to say "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all" We could all learn from that simple statement I'm sure.

Rev



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by elevenaugust
 


yes, looks like we may be getting closer to whom was involved with 9/11 and a few other things, masterminds?

Thought police...?
edit on 12-5-2012 by earthinhabitant because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-5-2012 by earthinhabitant because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Germanicus
Pretty scary.

Most ATS members could be arrested.

I wonder how far they can go back to look. Will the stuff we post today and in the past be used against us in the future?


great question. we can all go back to our myspace profiles and find something that we wish we hadn't posted. i can just see the Obama justice dept scouring GLP and ATS and other more... um... racist blogs (couldn't think of a better word for the more disgraceful part of our internet)... to find people who post "obama should be tried for treason and executed!" to throw in jail. there's a big difference between typing something up on twitter and going out into the street and committing violence. I don't see how something like IDing a rape victim is a crime. low? unnecessary? weird? sure. worthy of governmental punishment? IDTS.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   
i some times take the p##s out of hulk hogan... hope they dont get me for that.... and i always retweet ats twitter feed when i can..



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by RicoMarston
reply to post by elevenaugust
 


scary. how can you regulate a 140 character profile post? if i want to go on twitter and spew libelous garbage, that's my choice. just like it's everybody else's choice to follow me or not. maybe if there was clear evidence that your post led to violence or crime, then MAYBE this could be justified. but honestly, I feel like law enforcement has better things to spend the public's money on than cruising twitter for sh#t-talkers. even in Britain!


what you communicate online is no different from what you would communicate publicly in person, only the racists are afraid of laws like this.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by revmoofoo
There is no such thing as free speech, not even here on ATS. There are rules everywhere we go and if we decide to break those rules (as many of us do every day) then we should be prepared to accept the consequences.

It's not like we're all 5 years old after all, so surly we should be capable of censoring ourselves as and when required? And by doing so, we could have more constructive conversations that don't revolve around sensationalism and rumour mongering.

Also, as my dearly departed mother used to say "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all" We could all learn from that simple statement I'm sure.

Rev



censoring ourselves as and when required? what does that mean exactly? where is the Standardized Behavior Guide for world citizens? it would be NICE if we all held ourselves to the same standards of decency. it would be NICE if we all acted civilized all the time. it would be NICE if we weren't so prone to sensationalism and rumor mongering. but we're NOT. we're humans and sometimes we do and say stupid things that don't really hurt anybody and that we shouldn't be punished for. legislation should reflect the way reality is, not how we wish it were.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
People should be free to insult each other. Both online and in person. Also, it is not harassment when it happens online, because you can usualy block the user.

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by revmoofoo
 





There is no such thing as free speech, not even here on ATS.


Private sites are a completely different matter, so ATS may censor whatever they want. It is the censorship by the government that is unacceptable, IMHO.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by QQXXw
 


no... people who respect and value free speech and expression should fear this. I don't want to go online and spew hate speech, but i also don't want to have to over analyze and stress about every little post i make

let's say I reply to a post in a sarcastic, satirical manner and act like i'm a member of a mind set or group which i actually oppose. let's say my satire isn't very effective and people take my ravings seriously. should i be punished because i failed to emulate stephen colbert's comedy style effectively?

my point is, online and offline communications are NOT the same thing. how many times have you misinterpreted a text message? is it so far fetched to think that LEO's could misinterpret online comms too?



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
If something like this comes to the U.S., we won't be able to discriminate against people who've been to prison anymore because 95% of the population will be going there at some point in their lives.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by RicoMarston
 


What I meant was that we should be proper grown ups and not lower ourselves to such a base level. It's nice to be nice and the personal rewards are infinite. And this is coming from someone who actually hates people and can't stand to be around anyone for longer than half an hour or so. Take my neighbour for example, he's rude, nosey, arrogant and generally a neighbour from Hell on so many levels, but I chose not to lower myself to his level and retaliate in kind. In fact, I hold the building door open for him and his wife, I carry her shopping up the stairs and generally behave like an adult. After all, it's the bloke downstairs that's the problem, not his wife.

And also, by choosing to act in this way I'm actually annoying him more than lowering myself to his level would...OK, so I'm not the most mature person in the world. lol

Hope that clears things up for you Rico.

Rev



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by RicoMarston
reply to post by QQXXw
 


no... people who respect and value free speech and expression should fear this. I don't want to go online and spew hate speech, but i also don't want to have to over analyze and stress about every little post i make

let's say I reply to a post in a sarcastic, satirical manner and act like i'm a member of a mind set or group which i actually oppose. let's say my satire isn't very effective and people take my ravings seriously. should i be punished because i failed to emulate stephen colbert's comedy style effectively?

my point is, online and offline communications are NOT the same thing. how many times have you misinterpreted a text message? is it so far fetched to think that LEO's could misinterpret online comms too?


A law enforcement officer has enough common sense to tell you apart from the people who are really need to be taken offline and held accountable for their actions.

It is easy enough for me to communicate on the internet and I do so fully understanding that my IP is well known to law enforcement and that everything I have ever wrote on the internet will be used to determine just the kind of person I am.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by revmoofoo
 


Thats all nice and I agree. But when someone wants to legislate it, thats where I have to draw a big fat line. Because adult thing to do is to shrug an insult off.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by rikgrimsby
no free speech on twitter then... what one finds offensive another might not... time to get rid of my twitter i think


All for free speech, just it intrudes on others and causes problems, the line has been crossed.
Nobody has the right to say untrue/bigoted/racist etc things to anyone.
IMO

Shaun



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


Personally, I find the need for censorship of any kind to be a very sad thing especially on a site that insists that you do not use an ad blocker. Surly if I have to put up with those annoying ad's I should be able to say what I like, after all, I've done my part and let the ad load so that ATS can make money.

Sadly, this isn't how the world works and as such we will continue to be forced to succumb to censorship at every turn.

I'm trying to play devils advocate by the way.


Rev



new topics

top topics



 
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join