Slashdot Mirror
Thailand Sues YouTube
eldavojohn writes "Thailand is hitting YouTube with charges of lese majeste (up to 15 years in prison) regarding the recent videos on YouTube showing the king next to feet, something extremely offensive in Thailand. 'Since the first clip, more new videos mocking the king have appeared on YouTube, including pictures of the monarch that had been digitally altered to make him resemble a monkey. Thailand's 79-year-old king, almost universally adored by Thais, is the world's longest-reigning monarch, and one of the few who is still protected by tough laws that prohibit any insult against the royal family.'"
...including pictures of the monarch that had been digitally altered to make him resemble a monkeyPerhaps instead they should photo-shop him into the pictures of the child prostitutes for which his country is infamous (not X-rated would get the most press, just standing among the lineups, and next to the AIDS ridden ones who are dying would be appropriate). Maybe his loving subjects might reconsider selling their daughters into a life of misery.
posted AC as I am a coward, more reading on the king and Thailand
Submitted title: "Thailand *sues* YouTube"
Actual article title: "Thailand *to sue* YouTube over king clips"
First line in article: "We are *considering* taking legal action against the website," said Vissanu Meeyo, a spokesman for the information ministry."
Teeensy bit of difference, there.
"People" using "unnecessary" quotes should be "shot".
before there's too many idiots reguritating their nonsensical rhetoric concerning Thailand.
I'm a resident of Thailand, let's get that out of the way right now.
Firstly, all those who insist that the lese majeste laws are there because the majority of Thais would suddenly rise up and start doing what those without respect for anything would do are seriously disillusioned. And/or they've never traveled to Thailand. There's a deep reverence for the King here which arises from all that he has done. The fact that he has mostly remained out of politics has been a bonus, but the attention that he pays to his people weighs significantly in his favour. And the link that another poster put in that suggest that he had a personal dislike for Thaskin, and that is what forced him out of the country is laughable. As anyone who follows the politics knows, the situation had been brewing for quite some time. The fact that Thaskin was guilty of doing exactly what people hate Bush Inc for is conveniently either glossed over or omitted.
And to the inevitable "What do you expect from a country of pedophiles?" comments: There's absolutely nothing of the sort in your country?
And this, my friends, is why we we have the 1st Amendment to the Constitution in the U.S.
Your lesson in American History and Civics brought to you today by the King of Thailand -- Universally Adored by Thais everywhere!
My blog
Its amazing how many people don't understand how this works. There is a treaty, of which the United States, GB, and Australia are all signatories, that creates certain baselines for cybercrime. Since the treaty process was started by the Council of Europe, its rather disingenious to blame all of the resulting statutory implementations on the US. Yes, we did have a large part in the writing, but we were not the only ones who did, and the statutes that each country wrote as a result were their own doing. Yes, the US doesn't always play well with others (WTO, anyone), but the cybercrime treaty is good law, and in accordance with traditional common law principles. If you stand in Canada, and shoot a man in Michigan, you can be extradited to Michigan, if Canada decides that's the most effective method. Same thing here. If you hack a US server, even if you are in the UK, the UK can send you to the US for trial. Jurisdiction is commonly based on the effect of the crime, not just the origin. In this case, I doubt there is an applicable treaty, as the US Supreme Court would frown on restrictions of parody, and likely strike down Congressional implementation of any statute. Likewise, the Thai government could attempt a civil suit in US court, but I doubt that is going to carry much weight. Its also perfectly acceptable for Thailand to ban YouTube from doing business in Thailand absent a representative in Thailand for just this purpose, but if YouTube merely posts the videos, and Thais come to the videos, it will be difficult for Thailand to respond.
http://bgcommonsense.blogspot.com
You mean how the US made online gambling illegal? Or is trying to push to make AllOfMp3.com illegal? Seems like other countries are doing this too.
today is spelling optional day.
Find a Thai person in your home country other than Thailand and ask him, given that he is not at the moment subject to the laws of Thailand, how he really feels about King Rama IX.
I can answer that for you. He will tell you that King Rama IX brought democracy to Thailand, uses his vast wealth to help poor, rural parts of the country, and is just generally a great guy. He also has gone on record stating that the laws against criticizing the monarch are stupid, and often pardons those convicted of criticizing him.
And no, I am not Thai by any stretch of the imagination.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
If he's universally adored, then why are people making fun of him on the Internet?
Or is he universally adored in Thailand because it's illegal not to?
I live in Thailand, and there's no doubting the King is genuinely universally adored. For example, to celebrate his 60th year on the throne the royal family asked people to wear yellow shirts (the royal colour) on Mondays. That was months ago, but still in Bangkok now every Monday at least 50% of the people you see about are voluntarily wearing yellow shirts with "We live the King" written in Thai on them. No one has a bad word to say about the King even in private, and just about every household has a picture of the King and Queen too.
There's no doubt in my mind the affection is genuine and not legally mandated (after all, the Crown Prince is protected by the same law but much less venerated), although to what extent it's caused by "brainwashing" and propaganda is somewhat arguable. After all, if you're only ever told how wonderful your King is and all the good things he's done for the country and never hear a word of criticism, then who wouldn't love him ?
(Damn, I wish I could have people thrown in prison for making fun of me on the Internet. Wow.)
Interestingly, the King himself actually told people him and his ideas shouldn't be above criticism in one of his birthday speeches - though he's probably the only person in Thailand who could publically make such a statement! He also pardoned the Swiss guy jailed for lese majesty very quickly, so he doesn't seem to be the instigator to me.
As to why people put the videos on youtube, well who knows, but Thais I know who have seen the video are very angry about it - much more so about that than the fact that youtube is blocked. I've seen quite a few "boycott youtube" messages on Thai websites, so whatever else the failings of the junta government they do seem to be in touch with the feelings of the population on this issue, and they could have faced a bigger problem if they'd done nothing. It seems strange to me Google accommodate China's censorship and oppression but are unwilling to work with Thailand on this issue.
Personally I find the block very frustrating though, I didn't realise how often I went to youtube following some link or other before this!