Slashdot Mirror


Posting Porn Link Judged Unlawful in Hong Kong

hkxforce writes "Can you imagine posting a link to a website that would get you arrested by the police? In Hong Kong, a middle-age man has been heavily fined for posting a porn link in an adult discussion forum. 'A court in the Kwun Tong district of the city heard that Woo provided a hyperlinked message on the forum which, when clicked, would enable other forum users to access an overseas pornographic website showing the photos. But Internet Society chairman Charles Mok Nai-kwong said the court case raised several concerns. 'In this case, the court has given a new direction to the public concerning the responsibility of internet users,' he said. Mok added that he also believed the case could damage the freedom of information on the internet. 'This man posted a link on the internet which now becomes an act that constitutes the breaking of law, and my question is whether a link is being regarded as the 'obscene article,'' he said.'"

30 of 146 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Oh Yeah? by vivaoporto · · Score: 3, Funny

    If posting a picture of nekkid women in Hong Kong can get you arrested, I don't wanna imagine what happens to whoever is brave enough to post a link to Goatse there. Oh, my eyes!

  2. red light district? by polar+red · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is telling someone the correct way to the red light district also illegal then ?

    --
    Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
  3. CSI by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 5, Funny

    So when can we expect to see CSI: Goatse Victims Unit?

    --
    It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  4. Re:Linking bad, marijuana good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Direct link to recording between the cop and 911 (warning: very funny):
    http://media.freep.com/audio/2007/0510potcop_freep .mp3

  5. Yes, I can. by Chris_Jefferson · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Can you imagine posting a link to a website that would get you arrested by the police?

    Yes I can. If I posted a link to hard-core snuff porn on a primary school web-forum, it wouldn't suprise me. In my world of analogises, that would be like walking into a primary school and handing the stuff out on DVDs, and I'd hope most people would want that to be an offence.

    --
    Combination - fun iPhone puzzling
    1. Re:Yes, I can. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      walking into a primary school and handing the stuff out on DVDs, and I'd hope most people would want that to be an offence.

      God, what is it with you americans and sex. Why is it dangerous to see two people have sex, but it is perfectly OK to see people be beaten up, maimed and killed??

      Handing out DVDs in a school is, and should not be, a criminal offence. That is ludicrous.

      I don't know how repressed you were as a kid, but when I grew up, 10 year olds were reading pr0n on paper. They were just curious and it would not make the world better to arrest them for a criminal offence, just because the pr0n is on DVDs.

    2. Re:Yes, I can. by Chris_Jefferson · · Score: 4, Funny

      1) I'm not American
      2) I said "snuff film" which a) is people begin killed and b) I really hope you weren't watchin when you were at school.

      --
      Combination - fun iPhone puzzling
    3. Re:Yes, I can. by martin-boundary · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, and on 9/11 if we listen to your advice we only saw news footage of a bunch of fun loving guys and gals who were jumping off the flaming towers for the sport of it. Face it: TV news do snuff films all the time when it suits them. I'll also remind you that when you see a corpse in a bombed out shelter in Iraq, it's an actual real corpse of a real dead person who's still a little warm, not some faked up dummy like they have on CSI and other TV shows you think are cool.

  6. so what happens when... by Phil246 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    someone posts a link to a perfectly innocent thing; the host for which later either changes the image maliciously or as a result of a security breach into something forbidden.
    Would they hold the person who posted the link at fault then?

    1. Re:so what happens when... by iknownuttin · · Score: 2, Insightful
      someone posts a link to a perfectly innocent thing; the host for which later either changes the image maliciously or as a result of a security breach into something forbidden.

      On the other hand, if someone intentionally posts a link to kiddie porn or to some hate site, they can use the excuse of "I didn't say anything, I just posted a link!"

      The same would go here on /.. If I posted a link that just abused Apple or Linux users, I would be modded "Flamebait" or "Troll" even though I wasn't the one who actually said it. It would be considered as if I said it.

      --
      I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
    2. Re:so what happens when... by aussie_a · · Score: 2, Insightful

      a) Hate sites should be legal. As much as despise whats spouted, I believe in freedom of speech. b) Comparing it with posting a link to child porn would only be correct if normal porn is illegal.

    3. Re:so what happens when... by bheer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And you'll be surprised how this ISN'T the case throughout much of the world. Most Americans take it for granted, but it's pretty much an American innovation. Even liberal European democracies reserve very broad powers to curb speech in the name of a vaguely defined "public order". And you should hear Germans on how Nazi speech should be curbed (I wonder if they're really that afraid of neo-Nazis, or are they trying to suppress a rather painful national nightmare).

      And even though some people claim that there are ways to subvert this in the US, it's actually pretty hard (and you have rights even within Guantanamo, see Hamdan v. Rumsfeld). One /. poster has a sig that goes "the root password to the US constitution is child porn". Well, child porn is illegal because it harms those who society judges cannot protect themselves. The legal theory is very well worked out, for example, the Supremes have clarified multiple times that 'simulated' child porn, though repugnant, cannot be illegal.

      Free speech laws have meaning only if they protect speech that genuinely makes you mad. I find it astonishing that so many nations fail this test.

  7. Re:Oh Yeah? by owlnation · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The thing about goatse is though, is that it's NOT porn.

    It's probably more akin to horror. It's eye violence, eye rape. It actually is offensive to most people, it's design and utilization is to shock and offend.

    Not so with porn. While that does offend right wing religious fascists and left wing womens groups (what a nightmare combination), it does not offend many other people - most people, in fact.

    The object of porn is enjoyment. Thus it should really be embraced and encouraged as long as (some) controls are in place to ensure it gets to its appropriate audience. Arresting people for pasting links is not appropriate control.

    And since this thread can be safely considered NSFW, and is going to be a NSFW link free-for-all, then here's my preferred site.

  8. Pron != Murder by Nymz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If I posted a link to hard-core snuff porn

    That would be illegal because murder is illegal. If you were to dress up as Mickey Mouse and tell children to go out and kill for Allah, that would be bad because murder is bad, not Mickey Mouse. Though I could understand the confusion. :)
    1. Re:Pron != Murder by mikiN · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If you were to dress up as G.I.Joe and tell children to go out and kill for Jesus, that would be bad because murder is bad, not G.I.Joe. Though I could understand the confusion, more so if the G.I.Joe guy happens to be an Army recruitment officer.

      --
      The Hacker's Guide To The Kernel: Don't panic()!
    2. Re:Pron != Murder by Dragonslicer · · Score: 3, Funny

      Army recruitment officers don't tell you to go out and kill for Jesus. Only politicians do that.

  9. Where would something like that happen...? by julesh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Can you imagine posting a link to a website that would get you arrested by the police?


    Yes.
  10. Ain't surprised. by GomezAdams · · Score: 3, Informative
    Remember this is in Communist China. The press loves to tell us that China is now post-communism since it allows citizens to own businesses. There is still only one political party there, they have very strict policies against just about everything. And very strict punishments for all the offenses. And anything can be considered a crime if you cross the local CCP representatives. There is very little of what most of the rest of the world consider to be basic personal rights allowed there. Sure they can earn and make more money than before but the economy is still centrally controlled and the government has it's hand in the till to build up it's military and maintain it. The People's Liberation Army is there to keep it's citizens in line (Tianamen Square), not to keep people out of the country who want to enjoy having their lives being controlled and being threatened with punishment for just about any action we take for granted. The Chinese do not have freedom of press, speech, religion, freedom to gather in groups unless it is approved, due process of law, and ownership of anything can be revoked by the Communist at any time for any reason.

    Remember this when you buy all that cheap Chinese stuff at the stores that it is helping to maintain what is in fact a slave nation.

    --
    Too lazy to create a sig...
    1. Re:Ain't surprised. by Watson+Ladd · · Score: 2, Informative

      They are not communist or socialist anymore. They are keeping the name, but betraying the principles. "From each according to ability, to each according to DEED" lasted for about 1 day after the revolution in China.

      --
      Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
    2. Re:Ain't surprised. by erbmjw · · Score: 5, Informative
      Not really -- they are in semi-autonomous Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_administrativ e_region_(People's_Republic_of_China)#High_degree_ of_autonomy

      Currently, the two SARs of Hong Kong and Macau are responsible for all issues except acts of state like diplomatic relations and national defence: consequently, they have their own judiciaries and courts of final appeal, their own legislature, immigration policies, currencies and extradition processes. The pre-existing legal systems, namely common law in Hong Kong and Portuguese law in Macau, are preserved except consequential to establishment of courts of final appeal. With listed exceptions, national laws applying in the mainland do not apply in a SAR. These listed exceptions must involve diplomacy, national defence or something beyond the scope of the SAR's autonomy.


      The laws of Hong Kong are based on a mixture of British law and Chinese law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Law_of_Hong_Kon g

      IANAL --- but I did live in Hong Kong for a while trust me in Hong Kong you want to buy/rent/watch porn or go to a strip club to see naked women -- no significant problems.
    3. Re:Ain't surprised. by suv4x4 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Remember this is in Communist China.


      Oh right, in Fascist America we beat 'em again by suing people for links as early as 2000, in a case related to our beloved DMCA.

      Don't get me wrong, I don't have a beef with USA, but such remarks piss me off. The label doesn't mean a thing. Communist or Fascist or Democratic, actions speak more than words.
    4. Re:Ain't surprised. by tksh · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, this is not Communist China; this is bloody Hong Kong. You know, former colony and now special administrative region with its own law and mini-constitution, you know, based on British common law, you know, where courts swap judges with Australia on multi-year loans.

      I know you have an axe to grind but this isn't the story for you to sneak it in. This is about a judge making a stupid decision and a lot of people in Hong Kong getting worried about the interpretation of old obscenity laws on modern circumstances. Let's talk about that instead OK?

    5. Re:Ain't surprised. by Oligonicella · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, this can happen in print. In the real world, people who persue democracy are hardly willing to be told all of their work belong to gov and so would either not impliment actual communism or quickly dissassemble it.

      It don't work. Marxists need to get over it.

  11. Re:Oh Yeah? by MooUK · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is explicit nudity. I wouldn't call it pornographic in the slightest.

    Not all nudity is porn.

  12. Re:OK let's play by sheriff_cahill · · Score: 5, Funny

    Being an Australian, I wouldn't risk it. They'd probably extradite me.

  13. Very important detail by billcopc · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Did anyone notice the guy posted on an adult board to begin with ? So in Hong Kong, theoretically speaking if you're in a sex shop and you point out one of your favorite DVDs to another customer, would they toss you in the slammer ?

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  14. Translation by thepotoo · · Score: 2, Funny
    I did a Google translation of your post from Slashdotter to English, and got this:

    Speaking as Slashdot reader, I can safely say that I am offended by goatse and extremests.

    However, I love porn. I really like it. Like alot.

    So much so that I quit living in my mom's basement to try and make it as a an adult site webmaster. Traffic has been a little slow lately, so could a few of you stop by my site?

    I kid, I kid. Seriously, you made some good points.

    --
    Obligatory Soundbite Catchphrase
  15. Re:Nothing new... by haraldm · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you're German (if!) then you should think twice before starting to talk such rubbish in the public (I don't mind if you do this in your bathroom, though).

    1. Most households already have a TV set before they buy a computer. In this case you are likely to pay the monthly fees already. The vast majority of private households is not affected by classifying computers as TV receivers. You don't pay twice. Nothing to write home about.

    2. Running fora in Germany is not forbidden, even not de facto (and certainly not de jure). Otherwise heise.de would have had to close down already.

    But I don't think you got the facts right to begin with.

    Next time don't post anonymously, coward.

    --
    open (SIG, "</dev/zero"); $sig = <SIG>; close SIG;
  16. Local news and the forum in question by francium+de+neobie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you can read Chinese, here is the local news entry:
    http://hk.news.yahoo.com/070510/12/276r4.html

    The forum in question was inside the adult section of Uwants. There used to be a forum there that focuses on adult pictures, but that particular forum has been removed since the incident.

  17. Re:red car district? by falconwolf · · Score: 2, Informative

    So he should be held accountable if he had pointed the way to a church too, then?

    Not all religions, er churchs and other places of worship, are banned or illegal. Both Christianity and Islam are practiced, in the open, in China. While there is religious persecutions in China and the authorities discourage religion they haven't made it illegal.

    As for TFA, it's ironic the newspaper the TFA comes from is in United Arab Emirates which bans porn. Like Iran and other countries, the UAE has banned Flicker because some photos are considered bad influences.

    Falcon