UK Judge Orders Wikipedia To Reveal User's Identity

BoxRec writes with this excerpt from The Daily Mail: "A mother trying to identify a blackmailer who posted 'sensitive' details about her child on Wikipedia has won the right to find out who edited her entry. In the first case of its kind, a High Court judge has ordered the online encyclopedia's parent company to disclose the IP address of one of its registered users."

Comments

Re:Do you believe everything someone tells you?

[Raisey-raison]

This is the problem with where you balance free speech versus everything else. In the USA with the exception of national security, judges err on the side of free speech. In the EU it's on whatever is opposing it. eg blackmail., libel, hate speech, offensive speech, privacy etc. And in this case if the information is publicly available and is accurate then IMHO it's a great shame that it's been censored. I also think that the crime for blackmail should be to make the threat but NOT to publicize already public information.

Secondly it seems this is just another example of the law online going down to the lowest common denominator. What is the point of having the first amendment in the USA if some foreign court can gut it when they see fit (and Wikipedia is incorporated in the USA)? Part of the point of living in the USA is that you trade in some security (eg high gini coefficient, little welfare state compared to Europe) and in return you get more liberty (both personal and financial). Here though you get screwed both ways - getting the stringencies of both systems.

lol

[circletimessquare]

liberal this, milgram that, peta this. grasping at straws

you're firing your shotgun while stumbling back: a lot of random shot all over the place, none of them even remotely reaching what i am saying or who i am or what i represent to you and your "thinking", such as the absence of thought that you represent can be described

you don't venerate the concepts and ideas in the constitution, which i do highly value, you instead venerate the literal words, aping them back without the slightest attempt to actually digest the concepts behind the words. you're exactly like the maniacs holding up verses of the quran before they commit various atrocities: fundamentalist idiots, the whole lot of you. the document means everything to you morons, the thought and the concepts behind the document, nothing. because you've never actually thought about what the fucking words actually MEAN, you've just encrusted the literal words in gold glitter in your mind and marched around with them. fetishization, not moral thought

i value the constitution more than you ever can, because i am actually thinking about what the constitution actually means. you are merely regurgitating the words, and providing no thought to what the words mean. you're a fundamentalist. you're an enemy of what the founding fathers were trying to do when they wrote the constitution. you're very much what is wrong with this world: you've stopped thinking

i am not a liberal

[circletimessquare]

and you write "You view it as an means to control other people"

yeah, you got me. excuse me, i have to go suck obama's cock, since he appointed me dark overlord for retarded thread arguments, secret liberal fascist agenda workgroup #7A

pffft

any other paranoid rant you want to project on me and what i am actually saying? or maybe, gee i dunno, do you want to fucking actually read what i am actually fucking writing and actually fucking respond to that?

small cluebat for you: when arguing with people, it helps to respond to what they actually fucking are saying to you, as opposed to atavistically projecting your dimwitted little hysterical fears on your opponent, and reacting to that instead, as if your pantytwisted little fears actually have the slightest thing to do with what the other person is ACTUALLY FUCKING SAYING. its a sign of intellectual bankruptcy: you've run out of coherent things to say, so you throw scary words around

as i said, you're grasping at straws: you don't have anything substantiative to respond to me about what i am saying, so you're accusing me of random completely unrelated bullshit. because some part of you recognizes you've lost the fucking argument, but your stubborn pride prevents you from actually admitting i have a fucking point about your fundamentalist way of thinking about your so called "principles"

a three year old can be taught to say "free speech is important". it doesn't mean anything until he understands what free speech is. a teenager can be taught to say "free speech important above all else". it doesn't mean anything because he doesn't understand how complicated real life is. young, naive idealists understand principles in the most simplistic of ways. its a sign of ignorance of a wider world, a lack of wisdom and life experience. in fact it isn't really principles they have, because such inexperienced simpletons only understand the world in relation to their preconceived notions about how the world should work under ideal conditions that never really exist

real principles are understanding the concepts that are valuable to you in relation to how they actually work in the real world, how to sustain them, and how to keep them safe from some unfortunate and ugly truths about human nature which unfortunately bind us all. only then can you be considered a wise person: when you see how delicate such a concept as "free speech" really is, how hard it is to maintain it, and how it can never really be perfect in this world

instead of fucking marching around with words written in glitter that you worship, pridefully boasting you have "principles" because you say free speech is above all, which any fucking moron can say, and never really mean anything. well: i say pancakes are the most important thing is the world. oh yeah for me! who the fuck cares? what does it fucking mean? it doesn't mean anything. only when you have a coherent vision of how delicate and yet important something like free speech is are you a truly principled person whose mind has an appreciation of THE REAL WORLD

you're a simpleton. grow some iq points, try to understand your much worshipped but little understood constitution and its free speech someday, and then say something actually useful about free speech and how it actually works, and how to actually protect it. hint: its slightly more complicated than worshipping the constitution like a fucking cargo cult, protecting it from the horrible scary liberals

oh yes, evil liberalism: THE VERY FUCKING PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATION OF THE FUCKING CONSTITUTION, you moron. and ah yes, freedom of speech: A LIBERAL IDEA. sheesh. get some edumacation some day, knuckle dragger