UK Bloggers Could Face Libel Fines Unless Registered As Press

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UK Bloggers Could Face Libel Fines Unless Registered As Press

Posted by timothy on Tuesday March 19, 2013 @04:45AM from the cult-of-permission dept.

Diamonddavej writes "The Guardian warns that Bloggers in the U.K. could face costly fines for libel with exemplary damages imposed if they do not sign up with a new press regulator under legislation (Clause 21A — Awards of exemplary damages) recommended by The Leveson Inquiry into press behavior and ethics. Kirsty Hughes, the chief executive of Index on Censorship, said this a 'sad day' for British democracy. 'This will undoubtedly have a chilling effect on everyday people's web use.' Exemplary damages, imposed by a court to penalize publishers who remain outside regulation, could run into hundreds of thousands of pounds, easily enough to close down smaller publishers such as Private Eye and local newspapers. Harry Cole, who contributes to the Guido Fawkes blog says he does not want to join a regulator, he hopes his blog will remain as irreverent and rude as ever, and continue to hold public officials to account; its servers are located in the U.S. Members of Parliament voted on Clause 21A late last night, it passed 530 to 13."

24 of 394 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

You get what you ask for by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-19 04:50 · Score: 5, Insightful

This is what happens when the government asks you to register before exercising rights. Most think "Ah, heh, there's no problem asking someone to register before getting a gun." And then wind forward a bit, and you find you are being asked to register before you deliver critical speech. It all happens an inch at a time. And make no mistake, it'll happen here too.
Any hurdle the government puts in place for the second amendment (guns) can easily be put in place for the first amendment (speech). Look at the UK. They banned guns a while ago, and now they are requiring you to register before you write something on the internet?
They get what they ask for.
1. Re:You get what you ask for by MrMickS · 2013-03-19 05:18 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  If you pay attention, most of the people who were outspoken against press regulation were the big-money media companies. Funny that, isn't it, an industry that has proven to be out of control is against any regulation. So, let me ask you this, whose side are you on, that of Murdoch and the Fox Empire, or that of the general public who have been hacked, wire-tapped, lied to and abused by the press?
  So, use the existing laws to punish the wrongdoers, which is what is happening regarding the phone 'hacking' that led to the Leveson enquiry which provided the recommendations that this law is based on. If the press, and by implication bloggers, are subject to government censorship there is no democracy.
  Its no surprise that its the left of the political debate that is in favour of additional laws to control the press. Its alright though, they've got our best interests at heart. Just like when they wanted to introduce ID cards, and road pricing (vehicle tracking).
  
  --
  You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
2. Re:You get what you ask for by fustakrakich · 2013-03-19 05:46 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "hate speech" is bullshit. Arrest the followers, the guy will the rope, or driving the pickup. A human can resist temptation.
  
  --
  “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
3. Re:You get what you ask for by shutdown+-p+now · 2013-03-19 05:58 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  As long as they guarantee the right within reasonable boundaries, what's the problem with registering...?
  
  The people in power today may guarantee the right within reasonable boundaries. The (different) people in power tomorrow might redefine the boundaries, or refuse to uphold the guarantee.
4. Re:You get what you ask for by dbc · 2013-03-19 06:06 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  As long as they guarantee the right within reasonable boundaries, what's the problem with registering...?
  ... said all the gun owning Jews in Weimar Germany. Heck, said every gun owner in Weimar Germany. Which, when Hitler was properly elected according to the consitution, gave him a nice list of gun owners so that he could confiscate all civilian weapons.
  So, you want to start a blog, you say? Great, go to city hall and pick up your permit. Ever try to get a building permit for something? Anything? You need to define "reasonable boundaries", first off. Then, you need to get low-level functionaries in every bureau to apply the regulations even-handedly. And when they don't, you spend days and $$'s on the appeal process.
  You want to go through that for a blog?
  As to whether or not the US government is correctly observing our civil liberties (1st, 2nd, and 4th amendments, in particular).... an analogy to frogs in pots comes to mind.
5. Re:You get what you ask for by idontgno · 2013-03-19 06:25 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  You're right. A gun is not speech. It's even more elemental: self-defense, and the fundamental right to defend your own life.
  Fail harder.
  
  --
  Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
6. Re:You get what you ask for by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-19 06:27 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  The right to bear arms is held as high in the US as the right to free speech. Our founding fathers had just gotten done using guns to free themselves from a tyrannical government, and they understood the importance of the citizenship owning guns.
  The UK laws do not just penalize demonstrable lies. They punish facts that are harmful to a person.
  The UK doesn't even allow you to fight to defend yourself. If someone breaks into your house in the UK,and you have a bat, knife or hunting rifle, and you use either of those to fight off or kill the intruder, you are probably looking at jail.
  People like to talk about gun violence in the US vis a vis the UK. But keep in mind that murder rates (per capita) in Iowa, Idaho, Montana, etc, are less than most of the UK in terms of murders (per capita). Yes, in Chicago and LA and NY you are more likely to be killed than in the UK. But in middle American, in spite of everyone having a gun, your are less likely to be killed than just about any place in the UK.
7. Re:You get what you ask for by Dahamma · 2013-03-19 06:32 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I will go further. If you are a blogger, you are potentially a news organisation: you are publishing information for a very large public.
  See, now that's how they want you to think about it. So now you can just keep going down that same path and everyone who uses Twitter is now a news organization (after all, some people have millions of followers, while many bloggers only have a few), and needs to "register with the government". Same with everyone who makes their Facebook account public (or, why even bother with that? If you have enough friends, what's the difference?) Hell, we are all posting our opinions on a blog here for everyone to read. Why shouldn't anyone who ever wants to post something on the Internet have to "register"? ACs should be illegal!
  It's impossible to "register" with the government for a blog, Twitter account, or whatever and still *be* anonymous, so now there is no longer any ability to post anything contrary to the government without risking retribution.
8. Re:You get what you ask for by SomeKDEUser · 2013-03-19 06:42 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  This is not the way this works. If you are publishing "news" and want to be protected under the freedom of press -- which is distinct from the freedom of speech -- then you register as a news organisation.
  If you do not want to, you are not a news organisation, and anything you say in public may be construed as slander. Your choice:
  - You restrain yourself from slander (like now!)
  - Or you register and you try to make sure of your sources, and you get to exercise freedom of the press!
  And in any case, if you think the government doesn't know exactly who is the author of any blog with not-insignificant following, you are deluded. At least, now, it's open, and the registration is transparent.
9. Re:You get what you ask for by ganjadude · 2013-03-19 09:45 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Both are in the bill of RIGHTS, its not the bill of WANTS. Anything in the bill of RIGHTS, is fair to compare to anything else in the bill of RIGHTS, because if we can restrict 1 RIGHT, we can restrict ANY.
  
  It really is that simple.
  
  --
  have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Libel Fines by whencanistop · 2013-03-19 04:52 · Score: 3, Insightful

Bloggers in the UK could face libel fines even if they are registered as Press. That's the whole point of the regulator - it is there to force a set of known penalties on a press organisation if they do anything libellous through a known set of processes. If you're outside the regulator the penalties are unknown and the process could be expensive. It's not really any different to the current situation if you are outside the regulator.
Personally I think it is a great day for democracy. The people wanted this. They voted in a Government that did an independent enquiry and then actioned those recommendations. You can't get much more democratic than that.
1. Re:Libel Fines by MrLint · 2013-03-19 04:56 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Just because you have a democratically elected govt does not mean that their actions are in the spirit of or advance the cause of democracy.
2. Re:Libel Fines by Jawnn · 2013-03-19 05:06 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Personally I think it is a great day for democracy. The people wanted this. They voted in a Government that did an independent enquiry and then actioned those recommendations. You can't get much more democratic than that.
  You confuse democracy and civil rights; a common mistake. Asserting, however, that "the people wanted this" is patently absurd. Even setting aside the esoteric (for some) notion that civil rights can and should trump majority rule, I seriously doubt that most voters would have, if asked, been in favor of this monstrous affront to the freedom of expression.
3. Re:Libel Fines by SomeKDEUser · 2013-03-19 05:55 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  You misunderstand the notion of the rule of law and separation of powers. Even in Switzerland, a very direct democracy, the sovereign (aka the people) is still subject to the constitution, itself subordinated to international agreements and obligations, has no executive power and the interpretation of the laws is the job of professional judges.
  This is how you get democracy without a dictatorship of the majority. Interestingly, this process is most easily perverted when the media is owned by a restricted clique (I am not thinking about any Australian billionaire, here), thus the need for regulation.
  Checks and balances FTW!
Democracy will be imposed! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2013-03-19 04:56 · Score: 5, Insightful

> Kirsty Hughes, the chief executive of Index on Censorship, said this a 'sad day' for British democracy.
and
> Members of Parliament voted on Clause 21A late last night, it passed 530 to 13 .
This is a sad day for freedom, but a wonderful day for democracy.
Rarely do we see the difference, which few acknowledge exists, so starkly highlighted.

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Re:OUTRAGE! by xevioso · 2013-03-19 04:58 · Score: 2, Insightful

At least on matters of freedom of the press, I agree with you.
Hey Limeys, what do you think of our First Amendment now?
Re:OUTRAGE! by RaceProUK · 2013-03-19 05:01 · Score: 5, Insightful

Hey Limeys, what do you think of our First Amendment now?
I'll let you know when Congress actually starts respecting it.

--
No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
Nice! by nospam007 · 2013-03-19 05:12 · Score: 4, Insightful

1. Create a blog. (should take 4 minutes)
2. Register
3. Get a Press Card
4. Go to plays and concerts for free.*
*That's the profit part.
Re:OUTRAGE! by bazmail · 2013-03-19 05:12 · Score: 2, Insightful

You do know that the First Amendment has been eroded to the point of irrelevance right? There are so many exceptions, ifs, buts etc in various pieces of legislation that "The First Amendment" nothing more than a drunken 4th of July trailer park war cry. Your smugness when referring to TFA is as funny as it is worrying.
Re:OUTRAGE! by Psyborgue · 2013-03-19 05:28 · Score: 4, Insightful

Thankfully, in our system of government, while the president is free to hold such a belief, he does not actually have the power to enforce it, and either does congress short of amending the constitution.
Re:OUTRAGE! by shutdown+-p+now · 2013-03-19 05:50 · Score: 3, Insightful

At least as far as freedom of speech goes, US is still way ahead of most European countries, even with all the erosion of rights that has been going on. At least Americans don't have that ridiculous notion of "hate speech".
(I am not an American)
Re:OUTRAGE! by LoyalOpposition · 2013-03-19 06:10 · Score: 5, Insightful

I personally think freedom of the press is really important, but that you do not have a right to publish lies.
The really nice thing about the right to publish lies is that there are then no custodians with the power to determine whether something is a lie or not. Suppose you're a Conservative who's written, "Obama is the worst president ever!" Do you really want a bunch of Liberals judging whether that's a lie or not? Or suppose you're a Liberal who's written, "Bush lied, and people died!" Do you really want a bunch of Conservatives judging whether that's a lie?
The downside is that people are going to read lies, but it seems to me that the latter is preferable to the former.
~Loyal

--
I aim to misbehave.
Re:OUTRAGE! by ThatsNotPudding · 2013-03-19 06:18 · Score: 1, Insightful

Thanks. Now, back in your Freedom Cage, two miles away.
Just FUD form Murdoc and co by mjwalshe · 2013-03-19 07:03 · Score: 3, Insightful

The news papers who disgraced them selves on so many ways over the last 50 years have finally had that last drink - this is a campaign by the less salubrious elements that work for GMG to try and undermine the results of the levenson inquiry.

Guido is a stalking horse for Rupert Murdoch