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."

Comments

"United States government politics"

[Anonymous Coward]

The Slashdot FAQ says the politics section is for "news relevant to United States government politics." This story is in no way relevant to the United States or its government. This is an EU political story that does not belong on slashdot at all.

Why don't the editors follow their own rules?

Re:"United States government politics"

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, that's right, because Slashdot is run by americans and they think they're arrogant enough to think they are the only country that matters.

And you're here because...? Oh, that's right, there's no equivalent of Slashdot's politics section for whatever third-world banana republic you're posting from.

Re:"United States government politics"

[timmarhy]

you have a pointless life don't you.

Re:Before anyone says anything about free speech

[Anonymous Coward]

Amen! Somebody finally understands.

Free speech is one of the few things in life that is absolute. Either you have free speech, or you do not. Any sort of restriction, no matter how small, moves you from the category of having free speech to that of not having free speech.

At this point in these sorts of discussions, somebody usually brings up the appropriateness of somebody screaming fire in a crowded theater. But really, such a scenario is irrelevant. If it is deemed illegal for one to do that, then that person does not have free speech, as much as their nation's constitution (and politicians) may suggest that that person does.

Dumb Eurofags

[Anonymous Coward]

I have more sockpuppet blogs than they can count

Hysterical

[4d3fect]

This --is-- a joke, right?

Well...

[Vaille]

...as long as Stick Stickly is safe, the world will continue to be a pure and unsullied place.

Totally outrageous!

[merc]

Might I also take this chance to say that Slashdot is the best tech website on the net today. Why, I totally endorse it as a partial objective everyday web user!

*blinks*

douchebag usians

[Anonymous Coward]

shut the fuck up

It's not the speech part that's a crime you moron.

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a total fucking idiot. Really.

So, uttering a false cheque is protected free speech?

Bilking your grandmother out of her savings through a NIgerian scam is free speech?

Lying to someone so that they give you money is fraud, you fucking nitwit.

It doesn't matter if I pretend to be the deceased Prince Mobutu of Nigeria's wife trying to smuggle out his drug money or if I'm a corporation astroturfing. It's the act of trying to deceive people into giving you their money that is the crime.

The speech itself is a means to that end, but it's the totality of the circumstances that matter.

In other words: fuck you, you fucking fuck.