Slashdot Mirror
EU Bans Sock-Puppet Blogs
PhilipMarlowe9000 writes in with news of a new EU directive that will take effect in the UK at the end of this year to ban "sock-puppet" reviews or websites, part of an EU-wide overhaul of consumer laws. From the article: "Businesses that write fake blog entries or create whole wesbites purporting to be created by customers will fall foul of a European directive banning them from 'falsely representing oneself as a consumer.' From December 31, when the change becomes law in the UK, they can be named and shamed by trading standards or taken to court. The Times has learnt that the new regulations also will apply to authors who praise their own books under a fake identity on websites such as Amazon."
I don't think 'sock puppet' is a particularly good term to describe what's apparently being described. You want 'astroturfing', I think, or maybe some subspecies of marketing virus.
...an additional account of an existing member of an Internet community to invent a separate user. (Not well-worded either, alas, but the point is there under the clumsy verbiage.)
The sock meme has always been personal rather than corporate, as in the Wikipedia entry:
Companies are considered people because this enables them to limit their financial liability and encourages their directors to take greater risks. This in turn encourages innovation and is good for the economy. Courts are usually unwilling to go behind the corporate veil, but will do so in cases of serious fraud and the like.
If we are going to have a market driven system, this is arguably the best way to do it, though of course since there is less deterrent against irresponsible behaviour, it does require heavy legislation to ensure that the power a corporation has is not abused or used negligently.
Tomorrow, I may eat another house plant
In most european countries, there are two kinds of "personhoods". Natural persons are you and me, while corporations but also clubs and other kinds of organisations are legal persons. The difference is recognized, though it is seldom made explicit in the laws.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
"While England doesn't spell out its free speech rights as absolutely as the US"
Au contraire :
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
It does have some effect -- though it's not enforced as well as I'd like -- for example movies with paid product-placements are accepted, despite imho being a straigthforward violation of the above law. No idea why.
Yet.