Slashdot Mirror
Judge Issues Gag Order For Twitter
the simurgh writes with this excerpt from Reuters: "A British judge has banned Twitter users from identifying a brain-damaged woman in one of the first attempts to prevent the messaging website from revealing sensitive information. The ruling follows the publication on Twitter on Sunday of a list of celebrities alleged to have tried to cover up sexual indiscretions by obtaining court gag orders. The injunction, dated May 12 and seen by Reuters on Friday, includes Twitter and Facebook in the list of media prohibited from disclosing the information. It was issued in the Court of Protection in the case of a mother who wants to withdraw life support from her brain-damaged daughter. It prevents the identification of the woman and those caring for her."
If ever there was a way to get information out and about, trying to gag Twitter and Facebook is it! And once it's leaked, it's out there forever.
I've had to make a decision to remove extraordinary medical treatments from my father. It was not easy, but it was his wish. I discussed it with other members of the family. I only regret that his body lived for 3 more weeks before he died. I wish we could have ended his life quicker, pain free. He wasted away. I could be more humane towards a dying animal than towards my father. That's just sad.
I'd hope that my family would choose similarly if I ever need this decision made about me. I'd want them to have closure and move on as best they could. A quick death would be appreciated when the time came.
I'm certain the judge and the petitioners thought they were doing the best they could by asking to block this information publication. It shows little understanding of the web and internet.
I will not attempt to find out who this was. Sure, I'm curious, but my humanity tells me to leave these people alone.
Religious fanatics - screw you. This is real, not some imaginary friend you can "prey" to for wishes to come true.
A few weeks ago, my Aunt died and I expect my mother to pass away in the next year or so. She is ready and has made her wishes known to me and the other family members. I'm certain that a few will want to do everything they can to prolong her suffering. That is not her wish.
Have this discussion with your family. Having your wishes in writing helps, but they can overrule those at the time. Have the talk before it is too late. Don't leave them guessing. They will wonder for the rest of their lives and it can eat away at them if there's any doubt.
Entirely wrong. This also prevents newspapers and TV from reporting that this issue was on Farcebook or Twitter.
I also gives explicit moral support for the family affected that they are right in not wanting to have this dragged out in the open.
My guess is the judge in question knows exactly what he is doing and what effects it will have. I applaud his decision.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Laws don't prevent anything, just because somebody wrote somewhere 'Thou shalt not kill' has no bearing on your ability to kill.
The use and appropriateness of injunctions doesn't change as a function of technology and the injunction will in fact have an effect; it will deter some people, the
fact that it won't deter 100% is immaterial. The real problem is the exposure created by the injunction. That exposure only exists because it was the first injunction (according the author) that explicitly referenced twitter. The 2nd, 3rd or 100th time there's an injunction explicitly referencing twitter nobody will talk about it and the injunction will have roughly the same effect as it would have 20, 40 or 80 years ago.
So you hurt people just to spite them? If someone asks you to hold the door for them, do you slam it in their face for not saying "please"?
Seriously -- The safe harbor provisions of the DMCA provide Twitter, Facebook, Slashdot, and any other user generated content providers protection against their users' blatant disregard for retarded orders such as these.
Effectively, The Facebook or Twitter staff themselves can't release the info on their home pages / blogs / etc, but we, as users, can post whatever the hell we want (esp. in responce to a blog post by a Twitter or Facebook employee's saying that they have been gaged against releasing the information).
It's the 1st amendment because it's the most important one -- they can't inhibit the spread of information if it wants to be free; To do so is unconstitutional.
The point of the order is not to prevent people identifying the family. This is a mistake common to law-abiding people -- thinking that a law or a court order prevents a behaviour. Such a law/order can never do so, however, it gives the people harmed by a breach of the law/order a legal remedy. "a lock only stops an honest man", however if a dishonest one breaks that lock, the crime is more severe than had he merely walked in through an unlocked door. Without the order, bringing attention to this family is merely reprehensible socially inexcusable behaviour, now it is a crime, and the might of the law can be brought to bear on those who ignore the order.
Free speech is infinitely more important.
It wasn't a free speech issue until the judge granted the gag order, just an "oh yeah pro-lifers are shit stains" issue. By applying for the gag order, the family created a free speech issue and painted targets on their foreheads. And yes I'd indirectly help people I loath do despicable things simply to make that point.
England's ridiculous libel & public discours laws are archaic relics of their class system that have no place in the modern world.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
This ceased to be about pro-life protesters, or even gun toting pro-lifers, the moment they applied for an injunction on people not currently involved in any related court proceedings. It's now only about the gag order.
I think people should die whenever they damn well feel like it. If their brain has been fried badly enough that they no longer have any opinions about anything, then their family should decide.. and pay for the life support after some reasonable period. If there isn't anyone to decide, then the hospital should humanely terminate them, and spend it's resources on people with working brains.
All that's irrelevant now though, British libel & gag laws are a despicable manifestation of that country's historical class system, originally designed to protect the toffs from the plebs papers. Yet, today they protect companies like Hempel and Trafigura who're busy poisoning people.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
Don't get mad at me. Get mad at all those libel shopping celebrities and other assorted wealthy folks who have abused Britain's incredibly bad injunction system. You certainly don't see a lot of this behavior elsewhere.
But no, it must be the Internet's fault that Britain's incredibly abused injunction system and the worthless brainless judges that have let it go on is now basically evaporating.
I will not take the blame for this. The UK has a shitty vile unfair system and all of sudden because someone relatively innocent is caught in the net bad law, bad judges and lazy politicians, you think you have any right at all standing on some sort of high horse? This has been coming for a while, and despite repeated commitments to review the current system, the politicians refused to and the judges would know no restraint, and now it's dead. Dead dead dead dead dead. Get over it and get over your holier-than-thou attitude. I didn't kill it. The judges and the celebrities and the wealthy did.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.