Slashdot Mirror
Manchester's Self-Described 'Internet Troll' Jailed For Offensive Web Posts
noob22 writes "According to BBC Online, 'An "internet troll" who posted obscene messages on Facebook sites set up in memory of dead people has been jailed. Colm Coss, of Ardwick, Manchester, posted on a memorial page for Big Brother star Jade Goody and a tribute site to John Paul Massey, a Liverpool boy mauled to death by a dog. The 36-year-old "preyed on bereaved families" for his "own pleasure," Manchester Magistrates Court heard.'" My favorite line: "Unemployed Coss was only caught when he sent residents on his street photos of himself saying he was an internet 'troll.'"
Not at all. If he'd used a megaphone he would have been guilty of Breach of The Peace, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, or some other equally relevent law. This is a case of the law catching up with modern technology ie. applying the same rules of conduct we have in everyday life to that which occurs online. Now you may disagree with the law and thats another situation all together, but its wrong to claim this is anything but an adaptation of current laws. Heck look at the development of the language used - the Telecommunications Act of 1984 sees alternations in the terminology used from "telecommunication system" to "electronic communications network" along with changes in what those mean. This is the evolution of law to adapt to the new challenges of online communication.
It's a jailable offense to believe the Holocaust didn't occur in many EU countries. As screwed up as the US is sometimes, at least it's not illegal to be ignorant.
The biggest threat to democracy is wilfully uninformed voters.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Even in Europe, you can believe what you want. Publicly denying the holocaust might result in fines. If you do it to instigate hatred, you might do some jail time, too.
So there it is, the guidelines wanted 12 weeks but that was more than doubled by the seriousness of the case and the specific fact-pattern. 8 weeks were then lopped off for making a guilty plea. Bit of math to help the geek cred.
Well, patting yourself on the shoulder about the freedom-loving stance of your country is certainly self-gratifying, but don't forget that this particular legislation was forced on Germany as a condition of their surrender. By the US, alongside the other winners of the WWII.
Charles Manson was a dick... it's not illegal to be a dick. Sorry the argument doesn't work. This guy was not prosecuted for being a dick. He was prosecuted for breaking a specific law. One which says:
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or
(b)causes any such message or matter to be so sent.
It's clear that he broke that law. Regardless of whether he's a dick.
The question is why don't we see more actual cruel acts? I would say it is because in normal societies social inhibitions prevail. But when societies break down, e.g. in times of war, acts of the cruelty are everywhere.
One might note that cruelty is easier when it's more impersonal. You will see many people making statements and expressing views on the internet that they would never actually say right to someone's face. (I am not one of these, I am an asshole, er I mean I speak my mind, in person also. If some douche does something douchey I say something.) When someone gets mad at you then there's possible consequences at arm's length. This is just a way of putting consequences back into the equation.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Ethnic cleansing shouldn't be confused with the methods used to achieve it, such as genocide. Ethnic cleansing is the removal of an ethnic group from a certain location by any targetted means, either legal, semi-legal or otherwise. Ethnic cleansing is fairly universally acknowledged as having taken past in Israel in the past:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestinian_exodus
Arguably the creeping borders of the security fencing and steady expansions of Jewish settlements represents a low-intensity ethnic cleansing to this day. How welcome do you think local Arab farmers would feel in buying a house in the new Jewish settlements?
I'm no expert, but it doesn't sound preposterous to call that ethnic cleansing.
It also occurs here in North America among expatriate Germans. It is an expression of hyper-nationalism. "My country is so great, it would never have done such a thing". Some Japanese do the same thing when they attack any attempt to talk about Japan's crimes before and during WWII. They "deny" the Rape of Nanking, the mistreatment of Allied POWs etc. Not to say that either case doesn't also include a large dose of "we are racially superior".