Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ISP Fined $5000 For Hate Content

Posted by Zonk on from the slippery-slope dept.

eRondeau writes "In a precedent-setting ruling, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has fined a hosting company for carrying 'objectionable content'. The material in question was White Supremacist postings. From the article: 'The ruling sends a very strong message that Internet servers, if they are aware there is hate content and don't take timely action to remove it, can be held liable,' said the Ottawa lawyer who filed the complaint in February 2002. The individual posters were fined thousands as well."

5 of 594 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Which raises an interesting question by sedyn · · Score: 5, Informative
    Freedom of expression is covered through the Charter of Rights and Freedoms .

    The only thing that is really censored is hate speech (including Holcaust denial).

    --
    Am I open minded towards open source, or closed minded towards closed source?
  2. ISP shafted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    You could say that the ISP got shafted in this one and was fined for things beyond its control, but if you actually RTFA, you will find out that one of the persons charged personally for posting hate messages is also the owner of the ISP.

    I don't think this case is a precendent-setting as the original post makes out.

  3. Re:Wait a sec... by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 5, Informative
    It would make it rediculously easy to shut down a forum you have a problem with. Just flood the forum with trash constantly.

    As usual, noone reads the original article. The ISP in question was owned by one of the supremacists fined. It changes the whole perspective on things.

  4. Slow down there cowboys... by Yaztromo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Whoa -- can everyone slow down for a second and take a look at the facts?

    From http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pag ename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=971 358637177&c=Article&cid=1142031016503:

    In a landmark decision, the tribunal ordered the men, one of whom ran the web-hosting service that carried the websites, to cease their hatemongering, levied penalties totalling $13,000 and awarded the complainant $5,000. It is believed to be the first time a Canadian Internet web-hosting service has been found liable for hate messages.

    In essence, the /. summary is not telling the whole story. This isn't a case of some corporate ISP where some customer happened to be running a hate site getting fined. In this case the ISP owner was providing the content, and not just hosting it.

    Additionally, it wasn;t the ISP that was fined -- it was the people who created the illegal content, one of whom happens to own the web service provider in question.

    You can't just start an ISP in order to avoid hate speech laws. The /. summary is highly misleading in this case, so please get off your high-horses and take a look at the facts before starting yet another rant, okay?

    Yaz.

  5. Re:Summaries by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 5, Informative
    But, regardless of who owns what, one should have a right to speak out. ( yes, i know its not legal up there, but that doesnt make it any less wrong to restrict speech )

    This is indeed a different discussion. I was merely objecting to the inflamatory and misleading Slashdot summary. The impression which Slashdot "editors" wanted to create was that it was some "random, innocent bystander ISP" which was being held accountable for something on one of the million of its websites, i.e. "Panic now! Anthing anyone posts on your hosting servers will get you in Jail! Run! Scream!". In fact, it is the people responsible for the site (who happened to be the owners of the ISP) who are being held accountable.