Twitter users given legal warning in Britain

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by petrus4

 

It is quite hard for the average internet user to avoid using social media, like you using this forum for example.

I admit that I had thought you were referring to Facebook.

reply to post by petrus4


Facebook for some, ATS for others.

ATS has as much incriminating information per member registered as any Facebook, Myspace or Twitter

reply to post by Taupin Desciple


Excellent point. The star, however, was for linking to the most obscure music video I've ever seen on utube. 55 views! And it was even a really good tune! Min3:33 contained a sentiment pretty much everyone here could get behind. (Original post is on p.4)

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by something wicked

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by elevenaugust

- 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.

17 people arrested because someone's name was admitted?
Wow, they will go to any length to hide the Truth.

What if some of those 17 people get raped in prison?
That means the government policy actually promotes more rape than would have happened in the first place.

I take it you don't know UK law or just don't want to respect it? In the UK, if someone is convicted of rape, it is not legal for the victim to be named in any manner of media. Those people did name the person who a court agreed had been raped, therefore they broke the law and exposed the victim to potential further suffering.

I have no inclination to worry about what may or may not happen to the people who willfully decided to commit such a childish, pathetic and cowardly act.

Talking isn't childish, pathetic or cowardly.

If you believe the State has the authority to censor speech through violent arrest tactics, than you do not have a clue what free speech is about.

Which is more costly? Allowing the state to arrest 17 people because they said someones name?
Or just trying to help the victim recover while ignoring the rest of the world's pointless opinions?

I am honestly bewildered that you would use false moral justifications such as "feel sorry for person X" and use this as the crux from which you CENSOR speech through government oppression.

I hope one day you say something illegal. Then you can sit in jail and think about how wonderful and awesome your Constitutional Monarchy really is.

You people care about what others think/say way too much and need to be put in your place (mind your own freaking business and stop arresting people over a word).

But since you find it ok to oppress people over a word, than I find no problem condemning your sick system of authoritarianism and totalitarianism.

You can't tell me to mind my business because you sure as hell don't mind yours.

Glad you got that off your chest, feeling a little bitter about something? I simply stated the facts - the same laws apply whatever the media, not sure where the rest of the bile in your post come from?

Libel/Slander laws have existed in a similar manner for over a century - and yes, you have them as well!!!!! Why do you think social media should work under different rules to traditional media?

The majority of your post puts words in my mouth that I didn't actually say (or type, more to the point), so calm down, think before you type and learn what you are talking about before just shooting off in such a childish manner.

I think that everything that anyone has ever posted can & will be used against us one day. I recently found a message that I posted on a computer forum over 15 years ago still floating around the internet. I suggest people think twice about what they post because there is no such thing as true anonymity on the internet.

This is ridiculous.

Originally posted by elevenaugust
- 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.

Whether you believe in the concept of ''racially aggravated'' offences or not, the fact of the matter is that these are offences on the statute book in England and Wales.

It makes no difference whether the offence was committed online or not.

Originally posted by elevenaugust
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.

The victim's name was publicly withhold by the courts.

What do you think would happen if someone stood in a city or town square, handing out the name of the victim on a flyer ?

This is no different to that.

Originally posted by elevenaugust
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).

This is a civil matter.

Someone made an unproven accusation and got successfully sued. Remember, to a sportsperson - especially a cricketer - allegations of match-fixing constitute a serious case of slander.


The upshot of it all is that people can't hide behind breaking the law on the internet; I know some of you probably hate that, but what you say or do in electronic communications is, correctly, treated in exactly the same as what you do or say in real life.

Originally posted by Sparky63
I think that everything that anyone has ever posted can & will be used against us one day. I recently found a message that I posted on a computer forum over 15 years ago still floating around the internet. I suggest people think twice about what they post because there is no such thing as true anonymity on the internet.

True to a certain extent. With a VPN Proxy or TOR solution (or even a combination) you can become 99% anonymous.

Everything is hackable, it's just a matter of time. Although with encryption algorithms like AES, Twofish or Serpent that time is rather long