Twitter Sued For $50M For Refusing To Identify Anti-Semitic Users

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Twitter Sued For $50M For Refusing To Identify Anti-Semitic Users

Posted by Soulskill on Friday March 22, 2013 @07:17AM from the feeding-the-trolls dept.

redletterdave writes "After a French civil court ruled on Jan. 24 that Twitter must identify anyone who broke France's hate speech laws, Twitter has since refused to identify the users behind a handful of hateful and anti-Semitic messages, resulting in a $50 million lawsuit. Twitter argues it only needs to comply with U.S. laws and is thus protected by the full scope of the First Amendment and its free speech privileges, but France believes its Internet users should be subject to the country's tighter laws against racist and hateful forms of expression."

335 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

I've been waiting for this... by FrankSchwab · 2013-03-22 07:21 · Score: 4, Interesting

Is an internet company responsible to the country that it operates from, or is it responsible to every country that they can be reached from?
The second would be a remarkably scary result.

--
And the worms ate into his brain.
1. Re:I've been waiting for this... by iamhassi · 2013-03-22 07:25 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Is an internet company responsible to the country that it operates from, or is it responsible to every country that they can be reached from?
  The second would be a remarkably scary result.
  This stuff has already gone to court. Google execs were charged with crimes in italy for YouTube videos showing bullying. Google ignored it and Italy couldn't do anything. If Internet was ruled by every law in every country then it wouldn't exist. Sorry France you lose.
  
  --
  my karma will be here long after I'm gone
2. Re:I've been waiting for this... by SternisheFan · 2013-03-22 07:26 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  How long until posting anonymously on sites like Slashdot is forbidden? (I can see an upside to this)
3. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:26 · Score: 0
  
  Is an internet company responsible to the country that it operates from, or is it responsible to every country that they can be reached from?
  Wouldn't that depend on if the country they are operating from is willing/able to comply with the country that was offended?
4. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:29 · Score: 0
  
  Only where they operate from AFAIK. If the French have a problem with twitter, they are welcome to block it from their people.
5. Re:I've been waiting for this... by bungo · 2013-03-22 07:30 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  For sure, it's responsible to any country that it can be successfully sued from.
  After all, it's just a company, being on the internet doesn't make it any different. It's like saying that all of those silly patents that replicate existing procedures are suddenly different and patentable because they do it on the computer.
  If the court system in a country can sue and get the ability to enforce a judgement, then the company is responsible to that country. If the share holders don't lose any money, then there's no problem.
  
  --
  "The best part? I became an ordained minister while not wearing pants." -- CleverNickName
6. Re:I've been waiting for this... by gstoddart · 2013-03-22 07:30 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Is an internet company responsible to the country that it operates from, or is it responsible to every country that they can be reached from?
  Likely, it will come down to if they have a regional variant of their service or local servers.
  If there's only a single twitter.com, and it lives in the US, and everybody hits then likely not.
  But if there is a twitter.fr, and they have a presence in France and promote their service there -- well, then you really are going to be compelled to adhere to local laws. You can't have it both ways. One would hope that reasonably, if I do something in the country I live in, and it's legal, no other country should have any jurisdiction. That way you don't get someone being sued in France for something which is legal where they live. Because half of the internet would be getting sued in countries where saying certain things is illegal, even if they've never been there.
  Twitter can't promote their products in other countries, install infrastructure there, regionalize their product, but claim everything else is covered under US laws.
  Of course, that's great in theory -- who knows what a court would decide in reality.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
7. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:30 · Score: 0
  
  Agreed.
  If Countries don't like it too bad, it sets a terrible precedent to all other sites who may not be based in those sites to may be pressured to comply to some of these crazy laws.
8. Re:I've been waiting for this... by mdw2 · 2013-03-22 07:33 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  In many places these draconian anti-speech laws are popular with the local people. This would not end the way you think it would.
  
  --
  This sig intentionally left blank.
9. Re:I've been waiting for this... by berashith · 2013-03-22 07:37 · Score: 2
  
  isnt this what happened to eBay in Germany when they sold nazi memorabilia ? I think they had to alter the auctions to not display content to certain regions. Of course the difference here is that twitter is just enabling someone to shout really loudly, but you only have to hear it if you ask to know what the person is saying. France may not have to filter, but the French people who dont want to see what people all over the world are saying may not want to tune in to a service like this.
10. Re:I've been waiting for this... by qwe4rty · 2013-03-22 07:37 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Or he is from Australia and a their upside is equivalent to a northern hemisphere downside.
11. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:37 · Score: 0
  
  If you're not conducting business in said country -- i.e., have no employees there to be arrested and no holdings there that can be confiscated -- then said country can go fuck itself.
12. Re:I've been waiting for this... by wisnoskij · 2013-03-22 07:43 · Score: 1
  
  Either are remarkably scary.
  
  --
  Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
13. Re:I've been waiting for this... by The+Moof · 2013-03-22 07:47 · Score: 1
  
  Considering I'm equally anonymous on Slashdot whether I'm logged in or not (having never supplied any real information for my account), Slashdot would still have problems with laws forbidding anonymity. As far as this site's concerned, I'm a username, password, and throwaway e-mail address.
14. Re:I've been waiting for this... by BitterOak · 2013-03-22 07:48 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  How long until posting anonymously on sites like Slashdot is forbidden? (I can see an upside to this)
  Some of the most insightful comments I've seen on Slashdot have been posted by Anonymous Cowards, and I've seen some absolute drivel posted by people with usernames, so what's your point?
  
  --
  If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
15. Re:I've been waiting for this... by tlhIngan · 2013-03-22 07:49 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Is an internet company responsible to the country that it operates from, or is it responsible to every country that they can be reached from?
  The second would be a remarkably scary result.
  This stuff has already gone to court. Google execs were charged with crimes in italy for YouTube videos showing bullying. Google ignored it and Italy couldn't do anything. If Internet was ruled by every law in every country then it wouldn't exist. Sorry France you lose.
  I think Italy arrested a few Google execs from Google Italy, which wouldn't be as scary - in which case as long as Twitter has no French connections (no servers, etc) then France can't do anything. If they do, France can go after the French company.
  (Which is basically OP's point 1 - since the company has operations in various countries, they have to comply with the law, but only in those countries).
  At the very worst, if a twitter exec was passing through France, they could potentially be arrested until the fine is paid for, I suppose.
  Since I don't think Twitter has any assets or anything in France, the French government can't do a thing unless they can convince the rest of the EU that it's worth pursuing through other EU assets. Maybe. They can also arrest any twitter exec passing through France, I suppose - the US does it.
  Of course, this would mean that while Twitter is protected by US laws, it's also subject to the whims of the US government, including those ones on copyright infringement and such.
16. Re:I've been waiting for this... by h4rr4r · 2013-03-22 07:50 · Score: 1
  
  Editors could screen for those.
  Pretty much all the GNAA stuff back in the day, or the computer first aid, or APK or general poor trolling is done by ACs.
17. Re:I've been waiting for this... by BitterOak · 2013-03-22 07:50 · Score: 1
  
  Is an internet company responsible to the country that it operates from, or is it responsible to every country that they can be reached from?
  Wouldn't that depend on if the country they are operating from is willing/able to comply with the country that was offended?
  I think in the past, US courts have been reluctant to enforce foreign judgments against US companies where such judgments would offend the First Amendment, so I think it would depend more on whether or not Twitter has a business presence in France or makes significant revenue from French sources. Since Twitter doesn't have ads, they may be okay.
  
  --
  If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
18. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:51 · Score: 0
  
  The same laws apply for any type of media. A company is responsible for the countries it delivers into, and has to abide to the laws of that country. Think of it as import/export.
  It is of course impractical for internet services to check for all possible free speech violations. But once a violation has been identified, companies should work with law enforcement.
  In this case the problem (I believe) is not that someone on the internet said something anti-semitic and it is a problem that this content was delivered to France, but that the France-based user committed a overstepped the boundaries of free speech. How do we know he/she is in France though? The authorities need to deliver a reasonable arguments for that (perhaps the twitter account says that explicitly).
  Generally it is a problem that e.g. German Neo-Nazis can spread their views (e.g. denying the Holocaust) and persue (re-)engagement in National Socialist activities (Wiederbetätigung) on US-based servers. In Europe we have a different discussion culture than the US. It is not based on the "Market of Ideas" concept, where everyone can yell their opinion and we hope the best one will survive. The societies decided that some speech and acts are not acceptable. This is within the bounds of the European Convention on Human Rights (see article 102).
  And so businesses delivering into these countries, no matter whether US-based, French or German, should be respectful of these laws, just like you they would not export Swastikas into Germany.
  Whether the laws are good or not is not for US-companies to decide.
19. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:51 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Sorry France you lose.
  No surprises there.
20. Re:I've been waiting for this... by jonadab · 2013-03-22 07:54 · Score: 1
  
  I vote for "every country where they actually do business in the real world". So that means every country where the company maintains a local office, every country where they have a call center, every country where they have a production facility, every country where they purchase materials or services (including advertising), and every country where they directly SELL goods or services (so e.g. Amazon needs to comply with local laws in every country they ship to directly -- including ones where the actual shipping is done by a daughter company like Amazon UK; that still counts).
  
  Obviously we can NOT expect companies to comply with all the laws in every country where there are people with internet access who might visit their website (even if doing so involves signing up for a free account). If no money is changing hands, it's not business, and if the company has no presence in the country, owns no property there, has no employees there, does not buy or sell there, etc., then that country has no jurisdiction over them and their laws are inapplicable. What are they going to do, seize all your assets in their country? We just established that you don't have any.
  
  --
  Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
21. Re:I've been waiting for this... by NatasRevol · 2013-03-22 07:56 · Score: 2
  
  Except that there's a German eBay - ebay.de
  And the restrictions only apply to items sent to Germany, France and others with similar nazi memorabilia prohibition laws.
  http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/offensive.html
  
  --
  There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
22. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:57 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The internet is "ruled" by whatever rules the host country allows (or is unable to fend off). In the case of Italy going after Google, the USA is the host country, and Google knows that it has nothing to fear because Italy doesn't have the ability to force the USA to hand anyone over for something that isn't a crime in the USA.
  
  But then on the flip side, you've got the USA going after people in the UK, New Zealand, etc, and succeeding despite the fact that no laws were broken in the host country because, this time around, the country doing the prosecuting does have the ability to force the host country to be its bitch.
23. Re:I've been waiting for this... by NatasRevol · 2013-03-22 07:57 · Score: 2
  
  in 140 characters, or less.
  
  --
  There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
24. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:57 · Score: 0
  
  How odd, by your argument, all the countries that have legislation protecting people for morons should be up in arms about it. And yet they're not.
  And all those countries that have strict guns laws should be up in (non-projectile based) arms against it. Yet they're not either.
  It's almost as if different cultures are, well, different.
25. Re:I've been waiting for this... by CanadianMacFan · 2013-03-22 07:59 · Score: 2
  
  There is also the option that the Twitter could be responsible for handing over the records of tweets that originated from an IP address in France since the tweet would be committing a crime there. So if someone in the US made an anti-Semitic comment and the French courts wanted the user details then Twitter can tell them to get lost. But if the tweet was made in France then they should comply because the local law was broken.
  Now the article mentions that the French judge said that the French Internet users should be subject to tighter laws. So I don't know if this means French people sending tweets or French people seeing the tweets. Also Twitter is using the US First Amendment of free speech to refuse to comply with the French judicial system but removed the tweets anyways. If they were so bad that the tweets had to be taken down then why refuse to co-operate?
26. Re:I've been waiting for this... by jonadab · 2013-03-22 08:02 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  > Who knows what a court would decide in reality.
  
  What a French court decides only needs to matter to Twitter if Twitter does business in France or has tangible assets there. Do they have employees or a local office in France? Do they buy or sell anything in France? If so, then yeah, French courts are going to have jurisdiction.
  
  If not, then they can just NOT fly overseas to show up to the French trial, let the French court declare a default judgment that "Twitter owes sixteen jrazillion dollars in fines", and then ignore it. What are they going to do, seize all your assets in their country? All $0 worth of assets that you don't have in their country?
  
  I don't happen to know whether Twitter does anything in France or has any assets there; but I bet Twitter's legal team has access to this kind of information.
  
  --
  Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
27. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Richard_at_work · 2013-03-22 08:05 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The moment an exec from Twitter steps within French jurisdiction (which extends a lot further than you think), arrests will be made for contempt of court - look at what happened to the British online gambling company execs arrested in the US for making gambling services available to US citizens, despite the entire infrastructure and company being based outside the US.
  Exactly the same situation as here.
28. Re:I've been waiting for this... by DavidD_CA · 2013-03-22 08:05 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  It amuses me to think that some low-level IT guy from Twitter might one day go to Paris for his honeymoon ... only to get arrested at the airport until a $50 M fine is paid.
  
  --
  -David
29. Re:I've been waiting for this... by patch5 · 2013-03-22 08:07 · Score: 0
  
  And (unless you use a proxy for everything) at least a small handful of IP addresses, which would probably trace back to you if someone really cared enough to really go looking.
30. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:09 · Score: 0
  
  Why shouldn't businesses have to follow the rules of their customer's nation?
31. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:11 · Score: 0
  
  Wait, does this mean the executives could get prosecuted if they ever showed up in Italy? Is this a new liability for being a tech CEO - a possibility of reduced vacation places? I could totally see an unexpected layover in Venice and there goes your exec.
32. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:11 · Score: 0
  
  WRONG
33. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:11 · Score: 0
  
  Oh, haha, we're in Australia and we're upside-down. Incredibly funny, no-one has ever made this joke before.
  Do you say the same thing about people from Brazil and Argentina?
34. Re:I've been waiting for this... by CrashPoint · 2013-03-22 08:15 · Score: 1
  
  That's because AC is the path of least resistance. Get rid of AC posting, and those things won't go away, they'll just move to throwaway accounts.
35. Re:I've been waiting for this... by arth1 · 2013-03-22 08:15 · Score: 1
  
  Only where they operate from AFAIK.
  No, companies are subject to the law of whatever country they operate in.
  However, given that a company cannot be extradited, it means that only Twitter France (if it exists) can be taken to court and fined and/or shut down. For anything else, the cooperation of the remote country is required, which normally requires that the law was broken in the view of both countries.
36. Re:I've been waiting for this... by bsDaemon · 2013-03-22 08:16 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  At that point, it almost sounds like kidnapping for ransom...
37. Re:I've been waiting for this... by jnork · 2013-03-22 08:16 · Score: 1
  
  Get over yourself.
  
  --
  Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult.
38. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:18 · Score: 0
  
  These idiots where making noise for several years, why do you think they waited so long to actially sue twitter? Could this http://thenextweb.com/twitter/2012/12/04/twitter-is-ready-to-open-its-new-offices-in-france/ be a reason?
39. Re:I've been waiting for this... by The+Moof · 2013-03-22 08:20 · Score: 1
  
  Logging IP addresses happens regardless if I'm logged into an account or not.
40. Re:I've been waiting for this... by v1 · 2013-03-22 08:21 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Though I think there is precedent against it, most (reasonable) countries' legal systems won't attempt to hold someone liable for crimes described by their legal system, committed while outside their country. Interpol (I believe) and extradition treaties can work around this however. Generally extradition is only to send you back to where you were when you committed the crime, in case you try to leave the country to escape local justice.
  As others above have pointed out, if anyone, anywhere in the world, could be held liable for doing something which is illegal somewhere else in the world, we'd all be in jail. Imagine if Shari law could be enforced in the USA for example.
  The internet shouldn't be an exception here. Twitter is providing a service, and if your country's citizens are reaching out and obtaining that service from outside your borders, holding the overseas company liable is silly. If you want to go after someone, go after your own citizens. Or go the great firewall route.
  This is like Iran trying to sue some company in the USA for providing instructions for how to use contraceptives on their USA-hosted website.
  
  --
  I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
41. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:21 · Score: 0
  
  Sorry, I was speaking more generally, not just about this specific case.
42. Re:I've been waiting for this... by h4rr4r · 2013-03-22 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  Most likely true.
43. Re:I've been waiting for this... by hedwards · 2013-03-22 08:31 · Score: 2
  
  There's nothing wrong with Iran suing somebody in US court for that, they would likely get laughed out of court, but that would be their right to do so. The problem is if they sue in an Iranian court for instructions provided in the US on a US based website.
  The same is the case in this instance, the French could have taken it to court in the US to get those names had they wished, but chose to use their own courts. And yes, that would be a mess if everybody was simultaneously under the jurisdiction of ever other court in the world, if they choose to create a website.
44. Re:I've been waiting for this... by weazzle · 2013-03-22 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  And an IP address in their server logs paired with your sign on or return to the site, and simultaneous access to other sites, some of which you may actually trust with"real information." And that correlation, paired with the requirement that server logs be maintained for, what, 18+ months, ensures that you can easily be identified if that were the government's aim.
45. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:36 · Score: 0
  
  But then on the flip side, you've got the USA going after people in the UK, New Zealand, etc, and succeeding despite the fact that no laws were broken in the host country
  I'm pretty sure that rape, child pornography, and copyright infringement are illegal in the UK and New Zealand.
46. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Dragonslicer · 2013-03-22 08:42 · Score: 3
  
  I would hope that even if someone can be arrested for contempt until the fine is paid, it would have to be someone with the authority to pay the fine. A low-level IT guy, or even a mid-level manager, couldn't pay the fine even if they agreed with the court ruling and wanted to pay.
47. Re:I've been waiting for this... by longk · 2013-03-22 08:43 · Score: 2
  
  That's always the case when a corporation needs to pay. Simply because the corporation itself cannot be arrested. It may be easier for the CEO to be identified with the company than a low-level IT guy but I don't feel it's that black and white. The CEO is usually not the sole person in power and the low-level IT could have chosen to resign when he learned his company was breaking laws in his beloved Paris.
48. Re:I've been waiting for this... by wonkey_monkey · 2013-03-22 08:43 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Considering I'm equally anonymous on Slashdot whether I'm logged in or not
  That's what you think, Steve.
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
49. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:44 · Score: 0
  
  Considering I'm equally anonymous on Slashdot whether I'm logged in or not (having never supplied any real information for my account), Slashdot would still have problems with laws forbidding anonymity. As far as this site's concerned, I'm a username, password, and throwaway e-mail address.
  Ah, but Anonymous Coward is a username, no password, and a mashup of a few million psychological profiles...
  You'd have to go purely to identifying a post by IP, as that's the only traceable bit of info (unless the AC has cookies and javascript on, in which case their Google/etc profile will still be enough to tag them). My account says enough about me that someone could probably figure out who I was with some graph analysis and a few searches.
  Figured I might as well post AC :D
50. Re:I've been waiting for this... by CanHasDIY · 2013-03-22 08:49 · Score: 2
  
  Yea, because causing an international incident is really going to bode well for the French government...
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
51. Re:I've been waiting for this... by CanHasDIY · 2013-03-22 08:51 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Do you say the same thing about people from Brazil and Argentina?
  Sometimes, but only if they're narcissistic dickheads with no sense of humor.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
52. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:51 · Score: 0
  
  That's not a fair comparison. With Italy vs. Google and France vs. Twitter both cases are civil matters, and extradition is for criminal matters and fugitives. The cases you mention with the USA going after people and succeeding were criminal cases--and were framed in such a way that they had to be turned over in accordance with existing extradition treaties.
53. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:52 · Score: 0
  
  Oh, haha, we're in Australia and we're upside-down. Incredibly funny, no-one has ever made this joke before.
  Do you say the same thing about people from Brazil and Argentina?
  Yeah, but they have a sense of humor about it.
54. Re:I've been waiting for this... by sangreal66 · 2013-03-22 08:52 · Score: 1
  
  Waiting? We've been through this before for almost the exact same issue when Yahoo! was sued by a French group for allowing the sale of Nazi memorabilia on their auction site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LICRA_v._Yahoo!
  Yahoo lost, btw
55. Re:I've been waiting for this... by PRMan · 2013-03-22 08:55 · Score: 1
  
  All the prosecutor has to do is point to Mega and Wikileaks, both cases in which the US prosecuted people who are
  1. not citizens
  2. never in the US
  
  --
  Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
56. Re:I've been waiting for this... by MartinSchou · 2013-03-22 08:58 · Score: 2
  
  Well ... the US certainly seems to think that it should be the latter, considering how much they like working on extraditions for things done while not in the US.
  To me it seems that France took a look at this policy and found it to be a grand idea.
57. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:59 · Score: 1
  
  Very true, but a body in custody is leverage.
58. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:06 · Score: 0
  
  This stuff has already gone to court. Google execs were charged with crimes in italy for YouTube videos showing bullying. Google ignored it and Italy couldn't do anything. If Internet was ruled by every law in every country then it wouldn't exist. Sorry France you lose.
  Yeah, that's France. Try setting up a server in Afghanistan, where there is no copyright law, and serve the latest music, CDs and software. See how long that will last.
59. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:07 · Score: 0
  
  Is an internet company responsible to the country that it operates from, or is it responsible to every country that they can be reached from?
  The second would be a remarkably scary result.
  It will be hilarious when Sweden enforces the GENDER laws to the rest of the world!
  Watch Sweden's GENDER WARS for more information - in the documentary a Swedish professor in Gender studies, with tenure at respected Uppsala University, exposes the HUNDREDS of satanist ritual baby sacrifices that is done in the name of the white man. Yes, really. Satanistic Baby sacrifices. This is what she says! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yn3cHsHnUPM
  Imagine when Sweden will enforce this on the rest of the world!!
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yn3cHsHnUPM
  Don't miss it and please share , these atrocities needs to be widely known
60. Re:I've been waiting for this... by v1 · 2013-03-22 09:23 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Well yes, any country can outlaw anything, anywhere. But in almost all cases, they will have no power to enforce their law outside their borders.
  For example, France could have a law that says anyone that wears their hat on backward can be thrown in jail, regardless of where they are at the time they commit the crime, and "must come back or be taken back to France to face justice."
  But most sensible countries understand that it's arrogant, presumptuous, and more importantly, generally a waste of time, to tell someone in another country that they're actively breaking a local law, or to demand that another country hand their citizen over to their zealous justice system.
  Unfortunately, now and then we see cases where someone does something that's legal where they are, but illegal somewhere else, and then travels back to the country where the prior action was illegal, and find themselves arrested. And in VERY extreme and rare cases thankfully, they are basically kidnapped (forcefully deported out of another country, and taken against their will to the other country) and then set on trial. (I think we could call this "being kim-dotcomm'ed) I'm very much against that practice, but it does happen from time to time. And sometimes they even get away with it.
  Normally this wouldn't be an issue that France would be getting too ballsy with, but there's a LOT of money at stake, and nothing "greases the wheels of justice" quite like a fistfull of cash.
  Bottom line here I think is it would be a very bad risk right now for anyone that could be considered "a legal representation of Twitter" to step foot in France. (board member, ceo, etc) It'd be unlikely to pan out in the end, but they definitely get arrested (or at least get their passport taken for awhile) and get things dragged out a bit before someone with authority started publicly lambasting and beating some common sense into the court that's trying to make good on their threat.
  
  --
  I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
61. Re:I've been waiting for this... by wiredlogic · 2013-03-22 09:26 · Score: 1
  
  Twitter isn't just a web service. They make use of SMS gateways which means interacting with various national phone systems. So long as they purchase telecom services in foreign countries they risk subjugation to those countries laws.
  
  --
  I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
62. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:30 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Dear AC,
  
  You shall not talk about France that way. Identify yourself or deal with the full wrath and power of the French.
63. Re:I've been waiting for this... by CrimsonAvenger · 2013-03-22 09:43 · Score: 1
  
  Wikileaks?
  We prosecuted someone from Wikileaks?
  When was this?
  Or are you suggesting that Holder TALKING about prosecuting someone is the same as actually prosecuting someone?
  If the latter, you need to learn more about how the law works.
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
64. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Rakarra · 2013-03-22 09:53 · Score: 1
  
  That's because AC is the path of least resistance. Get rid of AC posting, and those things won't go away, they'll just move to throwaway accounts.
  That's probably one of the big reasons for Facebook's push to require verified real names. No throwaway accounts, no aliases, etc.
65. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Slyfox696 · 2013-03-22 10:01 · Score: 2
  
  Dear AC, You shall not talk about France that way. Identify yourself or deal with the full wrath and power of the French.
  I hear the French have invested heavily into the Acme Corporation. You've been warned.
66. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:03 · Score: 0
  
  and all the IT guy would do is resign from Twitter and reapply when he got home.
67. Re:I've been waiting for this... by KZigurs · 2013-03-22 10:04 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  USA has been doing this for decades... Especially with online gaming companies that might not even serve US customers.
68. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:08 · Score: 1
  
  Interestingly enough though, many jurisdictions do in fact claim jurisdiction over services targeting anybody residing within their borders. This is how most consumer protection legislation works and is readily accepted in most international treaties. Enforcement as a result is mostly an issue where jurisdictions are involved that have not ratified such treaties.
69. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:09 · Score: 0
  
  France should take the example of other nations and police the Internet as they see fit. It's the height of laziness to expect people to do YOUR policing and YOUR repression for you. Even China knows better.
  As sarcastic as I was being, I do believe that France has no moral high ground here. They want to participate in this vast social experiment called the Internet, so they have to take responsibility for their own silly laws.
70. Re:I've been waiting for this... by sveinungkv · 2013-03-22 10:10 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  At that point, it almost sounds like kidnapping for ransom...
  Why almost?
  
  Indeed, that was an apt and true reply which was given to Alexander the Great by a pirate who had been seized. For when that king had asked the man what he meant by keeping hostile possession of the sea, he answered with bold pride, "What you mean by seizing the whole earth; but because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, while you who does it with a great fleet are styled emperor."
  (Augustine of Hippo in "City of God" book IV Chapter 4)
  
  --
  Spelling/grammar nazis welcome (English is not my first language and I am trying to improve my spelling/grammar)
71. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Calydor · 2013-03-22 10:12 · Score: 1
  
  What guarantee would he have that he would get his job back and not end up unemployed because his employer only cares about the bottom line?
  
  --
  -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
72. Re:I've been waiting for this... by CanHasDIY · 2013-03-22 10:17 · Score: 1
  
  Parse top line of sig for response.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
73. Re:I've been waiting for this... by SydShamino · 2013-03-22 10:18 · Score: 2
  
  Spain, on the other hand, I believe claims sovereign rights to prosecute crimes against Spanish nationals regardless of where they were committed. This means that if you kill a Spaniard while in South America, for example, and aren't "sufficiently" punished for your crime there, Spain may attempt to get you arrested and extradited to Spain where you can stand trial. Occasionally, they are successful.
  I do not know which Spanish laws have such worldwide jurisdiction under their law.
  
  --
  It doesn't hurt to be nice.
74. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:26 · Score: 0
  
  You asked for it... is this your resume?
  http://www.babymeat.com/~dogcow/resume.html
75. Re:I've been waiting for this... by v1 · 2013-03-22 10:34 · Score: 1
  
  That sounds like it only applies to Spanish Citizens while abroad. For example, if a Spaniard kills someone in Morocco while on vacation, and returns to Spain, they may be tried for the murder he committed while in Morocco. It may require someone from Morocco to come over - a witness or something.
  But no Spanish laws apply to a Moroccan running a web site in Morocco offering pirated software that a Spaniard downloads while in Spain. (they may go after the Spaniard however)
  
  --
  I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
76. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:40 · Score: 0
  
  Worst thing that could happen is that twitter ceases to be available in France. It's kind of what we Germans have to live with due to GEMA (possibly) holding the rights to every fucking song in the world.
77. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:43 · Score: 0
  
  No, but they aren't a colony of British criminals.
78. Re:I've been waiting for this... by bhagwad · 2013-03-22 10:46 · Score: 1
  
  That nation is free to block the website if they way.
  Otherwise, as mentioned above, said country can go fuck itself.
79. Re:I've been waiting for this... by MartinSchou · 2013-03-22 10:50 · Score: 1
  
  This is like Iran trying to sue some company in the USA for providing instructions for how to use contraceptives on their USA-hosted website.
  Ehh ... what? Since when have contraceptives been illegal in Iran?
80. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:56 · Score: 0
  
  This reminds me about an extradition request from the US some years ago. A dutch man (Paul Dietz) sold xtc to americans (in Amsteram), who "smuggled" it into the US (they were DEA). By your example he would be untouchable for US law, the crime took place on dutch soil, entrapment isn't legal here as far as I know. But somehow US laws/interests always have priority.
81. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 11:10 · Score: 0
  
  USA has been doing this for decades... Especially with online gaming companies that might not even serve US customers.
  Bullshit. Your claim, your job to provide proof.
82. Re:I've been waiting for this... by jafiwam · 2013-03-22 11:15 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry France you lose.
  No surprises there.
  Goddamnit. I just wasted half a glass of gin snorting out my nose and all over my keyboard. Touche. Or whatever the french word for run away is.
83. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Mr.+Slippery · 2013-03-22 11:34 · Score: 1
  
  This means that if you kill a Spaniard while in South America, for example, and aren't "sufficiently" punished for your crime there, Spain may attempt to get you arrested and extradited to Spain where you can stand trial.
  Not really any different than the U.S. going after Bin Laden for planning 9/11 -- a crime against US citizens and residents, but not one that he committed within the US. See also the U.S. invasion of Panama and the trail of Manuel Noriega. Spain's claim is much more restrained than the US's, it hasn't invaded another country to capture high-profile suspects.
  
  --
  Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
  You cannot wash away blood with blood
84. Re:I've been waiting for this... by xevioso · 2013-03-22 11:35 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Q: How many Frenchmen does it take to defend Pairs?
  A: No one knows.
85. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Mr.+Slippery · 2013-03-22 11:36 · Score: 1
  
  And that correlation, paired with the requirement that server logs be maintained for, what, 18+ months, ensures that you can easily be identified if that were the government's aim.
  There is no such requirement in the U.S.
  
  --
  Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
  You cannot wash away blood with blood
86. Re:I've been waiting for this... by girlinatrainingbra · 2013-03-22 11:45 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Hey, it's already happened here in the USA for Dmitry Sklyarov when he came to the USA to give a presentation. Look at the details at U.S. v. ElcomSoft and Skylarov The case raised some concerns particularly since it involved an individual being prosecuted for activities that were fully legal in the country where they occurred.
  So Twitteronians doing twiittery things that are all legal in teh USA could get stopped, frisked, arrested, and jailed for having done things that are deemed to be illegal elsewhere in this great wide world. :>(
87. Re:I've been waiting for this... by akozakie · 2013-03-22 12:00 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Exactly. There are only two fair solutions to this. Either you need to follow the law of all countries in which your service is reachable - fair, but against the spirit of the internet and perhaps not possible at all without self-filtering.
  OR: dear US, next time you want to enforce your own laws abroad - go F yourself. High time to be clear about this. The only law that should concern me is the law of the country I'm in at the moment - and possibly the law of my home country (the price of citizenship). Extraditions ONLY for crimes committed abroad. Zero effect of US law on others (and vice versa).
  Anyway this goes - we desperately need as many cases like this as possible. And, for visibility, we need collateral damage - executives landing in jail during Paris vacation with zero reaction to embassy's intervention, etc. That's the only way to make it clear that either laws get harmonized through negotiations (which can be blocked in a democracy, see ACTA) or they simply do not work outside the border.
  Otherwise it's not a fair world, just a dominium of the one country with the biggest guns. And if you're american and like that thought, learn some world history and consider the fact, that maybe not in 10 years, but in 50, 100, 200... it might not be the USA anymore. How would you like your grandchildren having to observe the laws of, say, China? Or the United States of Arabia, or whatever...
88. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Diamonddavej · 2013-03-22 12:04 · Score: 1
  
  "The definition of the jurisdiction of publication is not where it was published, but where it was read." - Tim Worstall
  Worstall has an interesting blog post on Forbes, explaining the implications of the UK's new libel laws, brought in upon the recommendations of the Leveson Inquiry. In particular, he points out that under UK law, publication happens where the article is read. It doesn't matter where your printing press, news station or internet servers are. Foreign websites could be sued for libellous for material "published" in the UK, on computer monitors and smart phones. This appears to be the line the French courts are taking.
  The British Government Has Decided To Censor The Entire World's Press And Media
89. Re:I've been waiting for this... by weazzle · 2013-03-22 12:14 · Score: 1
  
  Good to know. But you still have the issue with log storage being a practice with online services. What is Slashdot's practice, I wonder.
90. Re:I've been waiting for this... by OldSoldier · 2013-03-22 12:17 · Score: 1
  
  Why is this even an "internet company" question... If I live in France and subscribe to a US magazine that I get in the mail could France sue that magazine for similar reasons? Would that US magazine be held accountable to French courts? Would/Could France prohibit that magazine from entering the country?
91. Re:I've been waiting for this... by TapeCutter · 2013-03-22 12:33 · Score: 1
  
  Sinking the Rainbow warrior only scratched their already bad rep from their habit of nuking Pacific islands, I think the French Government will survive this "international incident".
  
  --
  And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
92. Re:I've been waiting for this... by RudyF · 2013-03-22 13:25 · Score: 1
  
  ...Twitter France (if it exists)...
  It does. See: http://www.societe.com/societe/twitter-france-sas-789305596.html but all that is irrelevant. We're talking American interests versus other interests. Juridication and moral issues don't play a role here. It's about who can impose his views and who can't.
93. Re:I've been waiting for this... by sjames · 2013-03-22 13:40 · Score: 1
  
  Dmitry Sklyarov would be a better example.
94. Re:I've been waiting for this... by marcosdumay · 2013-03-22 13:46 · Score: 2
  
  Well, either way is better than stand in jail.
  What makes you think he'll want his job back?
  
  --
  Rethinking email
95. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2013-03-22 14:06 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  At that point, it almost sounds like kidnapping for ransom...
  Ahh, grasshopper, you only think there's a difference. You have taken your first step.
  Learn how memes rule the world -- how they are about getting large masses of people adopting them, in order to force themselves onto still more people.
  The content is irrelevant from this viewpoint.
  In one -- kidnapping for ransom, people who want money seize someone until they get it. In the other, people who want money seize someone until they get it.
  One thinks of themselves as dirty and rotten, the other as good-hearted and pure. The mechanism and end results are identical.
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
96. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2013-03-22 14:16 · Score: 1
  
  You'd think Europe would have learned the dangers of forcing smaller groups of people to knuckle under to the whims of larger groups of people.
  The yabbering is smoother, but merely addresses the previous go-round of evil. Hating Jews lead to evils in WWII; therefore we shall hate the hating of Jews.
  Join with me and hate the hating of Jews!
  Presumably after the next dictatorship disaster, people will then try to outlaw the hating of hating of Jews, and maybe Europe will finally learn to just let people be free to shoot off their mouths.
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
97. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 14:19 · Score: 0
  
  A jewish mother sent her son off to his first day at school with pride and lots of advice -
  "So bubeleh, you 'll be a good boy and obey the teacher? and you won 't make noise bubeleh, and you 'll be polite and play nice with the other children bubeleh, and you 'll be careful crossing the street to and from school bubeleh..... etc. etc."
  off goes the little boy to school.
  when he returned his mother hugged and kissed him and exclaimed "so did you like school bubeleh? did you make friends? did you learn anything??"
  "yeah " said the boy "i learned my name is Irving ".
98. Re:I've been waiting for this... by manu0601 · 2013-03-22 15:15 · Score: 1
  
  Sure no one know: what pairs are you talking about?
99. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 15:22 · Score: 0
  
  allergic to history books ?
100. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 15:25 · Score: 0
  
  One consequence could be France refusing to hand over a criminal in flight who has committed serious crimes. In essence we have treaties that define the conditions under which criminals will be returned from foreign lands. If France declares certain speech to be a hate speech crime and issues a warrant for arrest it could open a real can of worms when we need to extradite a serious criminal from France.
101. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 15:34 · Score: 0
  
  So a foreign web base game company can offer online bets in the US ?
102. Re:I've been waiting for this... by hcs_$reboot · 2013-03-22 15:44 · Score: 1
  
  Original version:
  
  Dearrr AC, You shall not talk about Frrrance that way. Identify yourrrself or deal with the full wrrrath and powerrr of the Frrrench.
  
  --
  Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
103. Re:I've been waiting for this... by hcs_$reboot · 2013-03-22 15:52 · Score: 1
  
  Q: How many Frenchmen does it take to defend Pairs?
  Usually one person defends one's own pair. But since half of people don't have one, I'd say 0.5 ?
  
  --
  Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
104. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Zemran · 2013-03-22 15:55 · Score: 1
  
  The US keeps trying to force its own draconian laws on other countries so it should not be surprised when other countries do the same. Next time the US wants some hacker extradited for looking at some US computer, they should expect their handling of this case to affect the outcome of their next request...
  
  --
  I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
105. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Yoda222 · 2013-03-22 16:01 · Score: 1
  
  It works with Germans too.
106. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 16:13 · Score: 0
  
  Last time I checked we were not able to kill people in the USA. Seems like a law which force the smaller group of people knows as "killers" to respect the will of a larger group of people (know as the "non-killers")
107. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 16:19 · Score: 0
  
  Twitter is providing a service, and if your country's citizens are reaching out and obtaining that service from outside your borders, holding the overseas company liable is silly
  Really ? So you think a company should be allowed to willingly provide services to the inhabitants of a country when it knows those services are illegal there ?
  Does that mean I can provide the inhabitants of your country (I'm assuming is the US of A) with weed without having to be concerned with any repercussions because hey, I'm not located in America ?
  And if that is so, why than does the US if A try to catch foreign dope-smuggles ? After all, they are foreign, and just there to deliver a asked for service to the citizens of it.
  Or is the "silly" remark just aimed at a "you can't touch us even if you wanted to" idea ?
108. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Zemran · 2013-03-22 16:39 · Score: 1
  
  They probably are but still have nothing to do with what we are discussing. Or are you suggesting that NatWest Three are child molesters? At least try to look beyond your country's propaganda and get an idea of what is really happening. One of those guys had already been prosecuted and paid for his crime under British law but was still handed over by the puppet government...
  
  --
  I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
109. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Dasuraga · 2013-03-22 17:32 · Score: 2
  
  I'm pretty sure that you can't arrest just any employee. At least in France, only specific people are designated as the legal "scapegoats" for a company's wrongdoing.
110. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 19:07 · Score: 0
  
  only persons with a fiduciary duty to the fictitious entity can be held personally liable for the said entity's actions
111. Re:I've been waiting for this... by AmiMoJo · 2013-03-22 19:12 · Score: 1
  
  If they issue a European Arrest Warrant then Twitter execs wont be able to go anywhere in the EU. They could apply for extradition as well, but I don't know what the US rules are like for that.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
112. Re:I've been waiting for this... by julesh · 2013-03-22 19:13 · Score: 1
  
  Simply because the corporation itself cannot be arrested. It may be easier for the CEO to be identified with the company than a low-level IT guy but I don't feel it's that black and white.
  Yes it is. At least in common law countries anyway -- in those, directors, other officially nominated corporate officers (e,g, chairman, company secretary, etc) and (in rare cases) shareholders can be held liable for the company's actions and debts, but not ordinary employees.
113. Re:I've been waiting for this... by AmiMoJo · 2013-03-22 19:17 · Score: 1
  
  Twitter has assets in France that they go after if Twitter loses. Twitter does business in France, has a French version of the site etc.
  They can either leave or be subject to French laws as far as their interests there extend.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
114. Re:I've been waiting for this... by julesh · 2013-03-22 19:19 · Score: 1
  
  That's a slightly different case, in that Sklyarov had been directly involved in performing the activities that were believed to be illegal, i.e. he wrote the code that broke PDF encryption thus prompting Adobe's original complaint. He wasn't just a random employee of ElcomSoft, but the employee of ElcomSoft who was essentially responsible for the company's actions. Now, as it turned out, the court ruled that the actions weren't illegal, but that's largely irrelevant to the argument at hand.
115. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Calydor · 2013-03-22 19:44 · Score: 1
  
  Well, if he's there on his honey moon I'm pretty sure he wants to stay employed to support his newly formed family, but that's just me.
  
  --
  -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
116. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 20:04 · Score: 0
  
  Sorry Israel, you lose.
117. Re:I've been waiting for this... by dwye · 2013-03-22 20:25 · Score: 1
  
  Somehow I do not think that the Twiiter execs are much like the shoe company executive in Kurosawa's High And Low. Very little leverage expected.
118. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Froggels · 2013-03-22 20:30 · Score: 1
  
  In France such tweets are considered a criminal offence. Anything can be criminalized.
119. Re:I've been waiting for this... by dwye · 2013-03-22 20:38 · Score: 2
  
  A bit unfair. They did a proper job of defending Paris in WWI, and it only took 1/3 of the military aged men to do it.
  Of course, after losing 1/3 of a generation, their response to any later suggestion to ensure that "They Shall Not Pass" is "Are you insane?!? I give up!" for at least the next century.
120. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Eunuchswear · 2013-03-22 20:44 · Score: 1
  
  Q: How many Frenchmen does it take to defend [Paris ]?
  A: No one knows.
  Well, I have about a thousand of 'em buried 500m from where I'm writing this. Is that enough for you?
  
  --
  Watch this Heartland Institute video
121. Re:I've been waiting for this... by dwye · 2013-03-22 20:57 · Score: 1
  
  Otherwise it's not a fair world, just a dominium of the one country with the biggest guns. And if you're american and like that thought, learn some world history and consider the fact, that maybe not in 10 years, but in 50, 100, 200... it might not be the USA anymore. How would you like your grandchildren having to observe the laws of, say, China? Or the United States of Arabia, or whatever...
  And IF the Chinese or the USArabia has the might in 50 or 100 years, do you think that they will care if the USA and American companies engaged in censorship to suit the French or not? Sorry, but the first sentence is the real state of affairs (OK, technically the country or countries with the biggest guns, or we'd all be saluting the swastika).
  If there is a twitter.fr, I guess that it had better submit, but otherwise, just have all Twitter executives mark out France from their travel plans for a while.
122. Re:I've been waiting for this... by dwye · 2013-03-22 21:24 · Score: 1
  
  Wrong. They went after Pinochet for his actions against Spaniards living in Chile, and Rumsfeld for his actions as US Sec.Def. Anyone affecting Spanish citizens anywhere in the world are liable for arrest and/or imprisonment if the Spanish can get them (which practically means if they enter Spanish territory).
  Your Moroccan would indeed be liable to any Spanish court that felt the desire to try them, once the Moroccan entered Spanish-controlled territory so that Spanish law enforcement could arrest them, or any Spanish-located assets liable to freezing or seizure.
123. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Hognoxious · 2013-03-22 22:18 · Score: 1
  
  So is a carrier battle group in the bay of Biscay.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
124. Re:I've been waiting for this... by girlinatrainingbra · 2013-03-22 23:44 · Score: 1
  
  But they were not illegal activities when he performed them as those actions were not illegal in his home country. It's like getting busted for being a member of a gang (by affiliation) rather than for a particular activity.
125. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 00:44 · Score: 0
  
  The US hasn't been a "reasonable country" since about 1980 or so.
  I'll admit a certain amount of amusement at watching a US corporation get potentially stung by the country's behavior which most corporations here are all in favor of. It is unfortunate, though, that Twitter hasn't to my knowledge really been one of the big cheerleaders for the US' bullying of other countries and their citizens. It would be better if it was one of the RIAA or MPAA companies...
126. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 00:47 · Score: 0
  
  "No companies are subject to the law of any country whatever". FTFY.
127. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Maritz · 2013-03-23 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  You'd think Europe would have learned the dangers of forcing smaller groups of people to knuckle under to the whims of larger groups of people.
  The yabbering is smoother, but merely addresses the previous go-round of evil. Hating Jews lead to evils in WWII; therefore we shall hate the hating of Jews.
  Join with me and hate the hating of Jews!
  Presumably after the next dictatorship disaster, people will then try to outlaw the hating of hating of Jews, and maybe Europe will finally learn to just let people be free to shoot off their mouths.
  "Hate the hating of Jews"?
  Perhaps, to safeguard the future, I should join you and help encourage people to murder all the Jews.
  
  --
  I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
128. Re:I've been waiting for this... by bitt3n · 2013-03-23 04:20 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry France you lose.
  you don't expect the French to surrender as easily as that, do you?
  
  --
  how many pairs of boxer shorts should you own?
129. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 04:50 · Score: 0
  
  Two problems with your statement. First, it clearly is not a criminal offense as the ruling is from "a French civil court". Second, while it may be true that anything can be criminalized, what is considered a extraditable criminal matter is spelled out in extradition treaties--usually in quite certain terms.
130. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 08:54 · Score: 0
  
  Let me think for a second. Is the jail in Paris? Where they bring a cheese cart by after a freshly-prepared meal?
131. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 09:25 · Score: 0
  
  not "local people" only a bunch of "chosen people" who likes to ransom every government, corporation or individual for whatever *they* and only they find objectionnable since the last 70 years or so. *they* do get the laws changed to help them get away with it by blackmailing every politician stupid enough to fall for it. may the "God" in wich you americans trust prevents them to do the same in *your* country. oops! sorry, your foreign policies are already enslaved to those interests...
132. Re:I've been waiting for this... by peawormsworth · 2013-03-23 11:52 · Score: 1
  
  Agreed. Whats next, Google starts answering to Chinas requests to identify certain gmail message users?
  Lat time I checked Twitter wasnt forcing anyone to signup and get their messages. If you dont want random people sending u messages u dont like, dont sign up for twitter or subscribe to other twitter user feeds.
  Maybe France should consider a country wide firewall, if they really want to control everything anyone posts online. Go ahead France... be like China
133. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Riskable · 2013-03-23 13:30 · Score: 1
  
  At that point I think most people would just quit their jobs.
  
  --
  -Riskable
  "Those who choose proprietary software will pay for their decision!"
134. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 16:36 · Score: 0
  
  At that point, it almost sounds like kidnapping for ransom...
  Ahh, grasshopper, you only think there's a difference. You have taken your first step.
  Learn how memes rule the world -- how they are about getting large masses of people adopting them, in order to force themselves onto still more people.
  The content is irrelevant from this viewpoint.
  In one -- kidnapping for ransom, people who want money seize someone until they get it. In the other, people who want money seize someone until they get it.
  One thinks of themselves as dirty and rotten, the other as good-hearted and pure. The mechanism and end results are identical.
  You seem to be ignoring the meaning of the word "sovereignty". A national government is generally at liberty to do damned near anything it wants, including many things that if an individual did them, would be called by many names, including piracy, terrorism, etc. The bar is a lot higher for applying those names to national governments, and whether or not they are, those governments usually get away with it unless and until some other government (or group of them) is willing to make war on them to take them to task over it, or do the modern, pussy equivalent -- "sanctioning" them at the "UN".
  For example, if a regime incarcerates large numbers of its own citizens for no good or valid reason, usually on trumped-up charges that serve only as an excuse to throw people in jail, then periodically murders them, they get away with it, as the US government has been doing for ages with its racist, bigoted and idiotic, failed policies designed to pander to one group by stepping on the neck of another. No one does ANYTHING about this, despite the irony that the US is constantly on other countries' cases about "human rights abuses". The fact that the US government is able to keep a straight face while vilifying China and other countries for abusing human rights, while at the same time allowing execution after execution, to say nothing about jailing people for possessing a basically harmless (but banned) substance is frankly shocking.
  The fact that the government not only allows but indeed profits (via taxes) from the manufacture, transportation, and sale of several vastly more harmful substances is downright disgusting. Then to add insult to injury, many jails are run as profit-making businesses, incentivizing convictions to increase the modern-day slave-labor populace. Amazingly we still have slavery in this country, its just taken a different and slightly subtler form. Don't believe me? Get sent to jail for something, then tell me they don't force you to work, and that someone doesn't pocket the fruit of the sweat off your brow, that you are forced to render against your will.
135. Re:I've been waiting for this... by RockDoctor · 2013-03-23 20:52 · Score: 1
  
  Since I don't think Twitter has any assets or anything in France, the French government can't do a thing unless they can convince the rest of the EU that it's worth pursuing through other EU assets.
  The phrase you're looking for is not "convince the rest of the EU", it's "issue an EU-wide arrest warrent." Notice that the consent, or even lack of disagreement, of other EU nation states is not required.
  
  They can also arrest any twitter exec passing through France, I suppose
  ... and when such a warrant is issued, and (appropriate) Twitter executive passing through any EU-governed territory is liable to arrest and extradition to the country issuing the warrant (France).
  
  the US does it.
  Which does not of course necessarily make it right or proper. However, one thing you can be sure of : since EU countries don't have the death penalty for anything short of treason in time of war, then the arrested executive(s) won't have the "I could be executed" line of appeal to follow. But in this case ... Twitter's network should have the capability of doing approximate geolocation on incoming connections. So, blackhole France ; route traffic from France-based netblocks to /dev/null. Or if that is too severe, just put a big delay (10 minutes ; 1Ks ; whatever) on such traffic. There are a lot of things that Twitter can do to comply with the French law, if they wish to.
  Incidentally, several EU states have territory in the Caribbean and the northern part of South America. So, for example, a Twitter executive on a plane that is diverted to Aruba could find him/her self arrested and extradited to France.
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
136. Re:I've been waiting for this... by WGFCrafty · 2013-03-24 02:49 · Score: 1
  
  I've always found this "French surrender monkey" thing odd. Did this start with Bush or WWII?
  I mean, not only does France have one of the highest military expenditures currently, but when i think of the French military i think of Austerlitz and Napolean's "Grand Armee." France raised the largest army on earth which then conquered most of Europe and remained undefeated for more than a decade until it grew over-confident.
  A French general will always grace the ranks of Alexander, Cesar, and Hannibal.
137. Re:I've been waiting for this... by lsatenstein · 2013-03-24 05:08 · Score: 1
  
  For the France population, the interfaces, advertisements and other references are localized to their country. If the anti'semetic (hate postings) originated in France, or directed against Frech citizens, then they do and should have that right to bring the hate posters to trial. If Twitter thinks that they can penetrate a market without respecting the laws of that merketplace, they are wrong.
  Now, twitter knows the origin of the pate postings, and if they were from outside of France, (USA) then I have not the ideas about what to comment.
  Perhaps it has to be as followsÑ
  a) Twitter indicates the countries of origin of the hate postings
  b) The country approaches the legal system of the poster's country and via the courts, lays charges or places other legal action.
  c) The courts will advise twitter via suppeana to deliver the ID of the resident user Ids
  d) Hatemail must not be allowed. It festers other abuses.
  
  --
  Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
138. Re:I've been waiting for this... by lsatenstein · 2013-03-24 05:15 · Score: 1
  
  Is an internet company responsible to the country that it operates from, or is it responsible to every country that they can be reached from?
  The second would be a remarkably scary result.
  This stuff has already gone to court. Google execs were charged with crimes in italy for YouTube videos showing bullying. Google ignored it and Italy couldn't do anything. If Internet was ruled by every law in every country then it wouldn't exist. Sorry France you lose.
  What you are saying is that if a person robs a bank in France, and flees to Germany or USA, then that person is free to continue, as long as he does not rob banks in his own country.
  Sorry, I don't agree with your "sorry". I could also argue that every message, no matter how big or small that is created in a country, is owned by that country. Exporting the message without permission is stealing it. And I bet the courts would agree with my statement. The analogy might be that you make cars, and I expropriate a few because I collect them. I only have rights to the car if a) you give them to me b) I pay the appropriate taxes and export licenses, and on receipt, pay my government the import duties.
  If the rule works for cars, it should be applicable to the internet.
  
  --
  Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
139. Re:I've been waiting for this... by welsh+git · 2013-03-24 14:27 · Score: 1
  
  Since when?
  "Anonymous Coward" is a registered user who chooses not to announce his/her username to the world. Slashdot would still have it without needing to go "all detective" on log files
  
  --
  Sig out of date
140. Re:I've been waiting for this... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-25 01:42 · Score: 0
  
  The cases you mention with the USA going after people and succeeding were criminal cases
  What part of not a crime in the host country was confusing to you?
141. Re:I've been waiting for this... by GameboyRMH · 2013-03-25 01:51 · Score: 1
  
  Presupposes that low-level IT guy can afford a honeymoon in Paris and get a real meatspace wife :-P
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
142. Re:I've been waiting for this... by GameboyRMH · 2013-03-25 01:54 · Score: 1
  
  The execs of DeBeers can't travel to the US for this reason IIRC.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
143. Re:I've been waiting for this... by chiefmojorising · 2013-03-25 04:08 · Score: 1
  
  WWII. I've never really understood it either. WWI, Napoleon, etc. -- there's a long history of them being anything *but* cowards and surrender-monkeys. Sure, they collapsed like a house of cards in WWII, but the Brits packing up and hightailing it back across the channel *certainly* wasn't cowardice (harrumph!).
  Now, that being said, I don't fault the Brits *or* the French. The Germans were in prime ass-stomping form at that point -- they had technological superiority, fanatical troops, and superior tactics. Their military leadership wasn't too shabby, either. France's fall was inevitable.
First they came for the anti-Semites by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:22 · Score: 0

but I wasn't anti-Semitic. We'll talk about Bieber.
Only Fair by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:24 · Score: 2, Insightful

The US government expects websites worldwide to bow to its law, it seems perfectly reasonable for a US website to follow the laws of any foreign nation.
Oh wait, neither of those things make any goddamn sense.
1. Re:Only Fair by hedwards · 2013-03-22 07:35 · Score: 1
  
  Those are sites that have a presence in the US, they had to go to the authorities in New Zealand to deal with the Megaupload problem, because the US has no jurisdiction over those servers in a foreign country.
  This is no different. The French can get outraged, but unless Twitter has a presence in France, the French laws don't apply as they aren't located in France and aren't French nationals either.
2. Re:Only Fair by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:39 · Score: 1
  
  Kim Dotcom
3. Re:Only Fair by MrEricSir · 2013-03-22 07:39 · Score: 2
  
  See item #19 here:
  http://www.ftc.gov/privacy/coppafaqs.shtm
  
  --
  There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
4. Re:Only Fair by oh_my_080980980 · 2013-03-22 08:21 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly.
5. Re:Only Fair by RudyF · 2013-03-22 13:30 · Score: 1
  
  Just because Twitter has a presence in France doesn't mean France has the ability to enforce its laws on a company that's American owned - whether those French laws are fair or not don't play a role here - it's a matter of who is ruling and who isn't - http://www.societe.com/societe/twitter-france-sas-789305596.html
So France should fix it by HalAtWork · 2013-03-22 07:28 · Score: 4, Insightful

France believes its Internet users should be subject to the country's tighter laws against racist and hateful forms of expression.
Then France can filter their internet. Why does Twitter have to do anything? If France wants censorship, they should implement it.

--
Twinstiq, game news
1. Re:So France should fix it by gstoddart · 2013-03-22 07:36 · Score: 2
  
  Why does Twitter have to do anything?
  Not knowing what Twitter's presence looks like in France, the first questions are: Do they have any offices/personnel there? Do they have any equipment? Is there a twitter.fr? Do they promote and regionalize the software to France?
  If any of those are true, Twitter is basically screwed in the same way Google was.
  If it's all in the US and not anywhere else, then Twitter will likely be safe.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
2. Re:So France should fix it by SuricouRaven · 2013-03-22 07:43 · Score: 1
  
  Twitter have purchased twitter.fr, but it only redirects to their US site. They probably have done the same to every country code, to make sure squatters or scammers don't get them.
3. Re:So France should fix it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:44 · Score: 0
  
  Oh, but they will... it's just a question of when. Just like any other country will eventually.
  Kudos to China for being in the lead.
4. Re:So France should fix it by clam666 · 2013-03-22 07:47 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Exactly. This is an issue for France vs. Internet. Not France vs. Twitter.
  If France decides it really doesn't want to hear tweets about Blue vs. Red states in the U.S., then they can bloody well create Le Carnivore on their own dime and filter those evil horrid thoughts that makes Jews or activists or whiners who never learned to deal with the world go Boo Hoo..
  This is like your little sister crying to mom because you said 'girls have cooties' instead of her cowgirling up and learning to deal with it. Don't want to hear about cooties? Solve your own problems. Don't like people being anti-semitic because it twists your nads? Handle your own homeland. Don't complain because someone, somewhere, is saying something you find "offensive". And stop bowing down to every sociopathic "activist" who thinks words kill rather than actual violence.
  Clearly France needs to hire Adria Richards to manage their twitter relations.
  
  --
  I'm a satanic clam.
5. Re:So France should fix it by gstoddart · 2013-03-22 07:51 · Score: 1
  
  Twitter have purchased twitter.fr, but it only redirects to their US site. They probably have done the same to every country code, to make sure squatters or scammers don't get them.
  Then, arguably, for every country they're purchased that domain, promoted their software, taken any advertising revenue, employed staff, or otherwise "done business" -- then they might have to obey the local laws only as it pertains to their citizens and what they make available in that country.
  If you staunchly set up US only, don't promote into other countries, and any international usage isn't something you sought out, then you can probably tell them to PFO.
  I'm not convinced that Twitter hasn't promoted themselves, or "done business" in those jurisdictions. If they've ever done anything in France, they can't then say they're only bound by US laws.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
6. Re:So France should fix it by NatasRevol · 2013-03-22 08:01 · Score: 1
  
  Definitely not all in the US, but doesn't look like it's in France.
  https://twitter.com/jobs/international
  
  --
  There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
7. Re:So France should fix it by gstoddart · 2013-03-22 08:04 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly. This is an issue for France vs. Internet. Not France vs. Twitter.
  Not necessarily. If Twitter is doing business in France, they're bound by their laws -- hell, if they've registered the trademark in France they're probably bound by them.
  Imagine if a Chinese company set up shop in the US, and then said "We're a Chinese company, we're ignoring your laws". It wouldn't fly.
  So it's going to come down to the extent to which Twitter has any business presence in France -- and if they have any, they're going to be stuck. And, since twitter.fr redirects to twitter.com the claim of not doing business in France might be nullified. Because the act of buying the domain likely means you agree to their rules. (And don't say that isn't true, because the US has seized .com domains for companies with no presence in the US because they claim ownership over the entire .com TLD)
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
8. Re:So France should fix it by gstoddart · 2013-03-22 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  Bzzzt, wrong answer. From the link you provided I can see at least 4 jobs posted in Paris, which oddly enough is in France.
  Which means Twitter "does business in France", and logically if France wants to sue them for the identities of French citizens who broke French law ... Twitter has no choice but to comply.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
9. Re:So France should fix it by ZombieBraintrust · 2013-03-22 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  Nah. They can just fire those people. And then never travel to France.
10. Re:So France should fix it by Hatta · 2013-03-22 08:51 · Score: 2
  
  France doesn't seem to understand that censorship is itself a hateful form of expression.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
11. Re:So France should fix it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:03 · Score: 0
  
  Depending on the definition of "set up shop" of course
  If I were running Twitter, I'd just block France. Fuck em, let them build their own services.
12. Re:So France should fix it by CanHasDIY · 2013-03-22 09:05 · Score: 1
  
  Then, arguably, for every country they're purchased that domain, promoted their software, taken any advertising revenue, employed staff, or otherwise "done business" -- then they might have to obey the local laws only as it pertains to their citizens and what they make available in that country.
  Huh, and here I thought ICANN was in charge of divvying out domains, not individual nations...
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
13. Re:So France should fix it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:19 · Score: 1
  
  If you have pay to have your US telephone number included in the french version of the yellow pages, not an ad or anything, just a plain ordinary text listing amongst millions of others, is that doing business and promoting yourself in france? Does that make you subject to all of french law? If someone calls you from france are you going to face sanctions for insulting the jews whilst sitting in your living room in loma mar, california, just because you are on the phone with someone from france, who called you unsolicited after finding your number in the local phone book? That's what twitter is facing right now afaik.
14. Re:So France should fix it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:22 · Score: 0
  
  so the us takes the domain name, what about it? the server is still up, domains at non-us registrars are still up. all the us did was say "you are not allowed in our phonebook, gtfo".
15. Re:So France should fix it by SuricouRaven · 2013-03-22 11:28 · Score: 1
  
  ICANN runs the very top, but the administration of the various TLDs is handled by registrars. The administration of the country code TLDs was given to their respective governments, either to handle directly or to contract to an operator as they see fit. ICANN keeps the whole system running, but have little to do with who gets individual domains.
16. Re:So France should fix it by sjames · 2013-03-22 13:42 · Score: 2
  
  Bzzzt, wrong answer. From the link you provided I can see at least 4 jobs posted in Paris, which oddly enough is in France.
  Shhh! Don't tell the Parisians
17. Re:So France should fix it by CanHasDIY · 2013-03-25 04:21 · Score: 1
  
  Well, I would say that this demands further research on my end, but I'm finding myself hard-pressed to give a rats ass...
  About the domain thing, anyway.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Begging the Question by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:28 · Score: 0

If Twitter ignored the court order because it came from another country, who's to say they will respect the decision of the same court if they are successfully sued? What reason do they even have to show up to the hearing in the first place? The US government isn't going to do anything about it, and it's not like the French government is going to send someone over to arrest them.
1. Re:Begging the Question by bluefoxlucid · 2013-03-22 07:33 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  No, Twitter will show up halfway through the trial and the French will immediately surrender.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
2. Re:Begging the Question by hedwards · 2013-03-22 07:36 · Score: 2
  
  They ignored a court order because the court lacked jurisdiction. Not the greatest way of handling it, but ultimately, unless they have a presence in France, the French courts have no jurisdiction. What they should have done was shown up and filed the relevant motions to have the case dismissed with prejudice as they aren't a French firm or operating anywhere in France. The courts with relevant jurisdiction would be located elsewhere.
3. Re:Begging the Question by roman_mir · 2013-03-22 08:35 · Score: 1
  
  How is that "begging the question"?
  
  --
  You can't handle the truth.
4. Re:Begging the Question by cory2253 · 2013-03-22 08:56 · Score: 1
  
  *Suggesting the question* is the phrase you're looking for. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
5. Re:Begging the Question by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:10 · Score: 0
  
  It's "begging the question" because suing Twitter for noncompliance assumes that they are bound to France's laws to begin with. That would be like me sending a bill to your house that you were under no legal obligation to pay, and then suing you for not paying. The whole premise is flawed.
6. Re:Begging the Question by CanHasDIY · 2013-03-22 09:55 · Score: 1
  
  How is that "begging the question"?
  ... Circular reasoning, perhaps?
  That, or OP has no idea what "begging the question" actually means.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
7. Re:Begging the Question by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:24 · Score: 0
  
  In many jurisdictions, showing up is an acknowledgement of jurisdiction.
  "A person is subject to in personam jurisdiction on any of the following theories:
  (1) Presence, i.e., being served with a copy of the summons and complaint while physically present in the forum jurisdiction. The physical presence of a defendant in the forum is a sufficient basis for acquiring jurisdiction over him, no matter how brief his stay might be. (Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. (5 Otto) 714, 24 L.Ed. 565 (1877). )"
  http://www.west.net/~smith/jurisdiction.htm
  So, showing up in the court is enough to ESTABLISH jurisdiction (at least according to US jurisprudence)
8. Re:Begging the Question by xevioso · 2013-03-22 11:44 · Score: 1
  
  This. I agree completely.
9. Re:Begging the Question by hedwards · 2013-03-22 13:42 · Score: 1
  
  That doesn't mean what you think it means. It means that if a foreigner goes to the US on vacation or to transfer flights, the US has jurisdiction during the period where the individual is in the US. It does not however mean that the US gets to try the person for things that are on foreign territory where there's a court they could have used.
  It would be a real mess if we had to consult with experts in international law any time we wanted to do something, in case it were illegal in some other part of the world.
10. Re:Begging the Question by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 14:17 · Score: 0
  
  It is the only way to handle it. Not ignoring means you recognized the courts authority.
11. Re:Begging the Question by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 16:18 · Score: 0
  
  On looking at the more in-depth, you are absolutely correct. I took that out of context. Thank you for correcting me, I learned something.
  On the other hand, a French court ruled that it DID have jurisdiction over a Yahoo ("LICRA v. Yahoo!, Inc") on vary similar matters. Yahoo appealed to a US court citing jurisdicional issues with the complaint, but on appeal the court ruled that it did not have enough jurisdiction to rule on the French order, at least until LICRA attempted to enforce the ruling in the US.
  http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8525567203494532167&q=%22Yahoo!+Inc.+v.+La+Ligue+Contre+%22&hl=en&as_sdt=2,5
  Considering the French stance on similar matters, I'm not sure I would want to apear in France if there was a case of this nature against me.
Twitter should say... by gurps_npc · 2013-03-22 07:29 · Score: 2

Twitter should send a letter stating: "We are an American company, doing business in America. We abide by American laws, not yours. We have no desire to abide by your laws or even to provide service to your country. If you don't like what we do, feel free to block us. But no one from our company will ever travel to France again. Good luck with your laws."
Note, I have nothing against France. But all countries (including the USA), need to recognize that the internet will their citizens do business with foreign companies and that foreign companies are NOT required to obey their laws. It is up to the citizens of a country to obey that countries laws, not everyone in the world.

--
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
1. Re:Twitter should say... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:06 · Score: 1
  
  Twitter should send a letter stating:
  "We are an American company, doing business in America.
  Not so sure, not so quick my dear! One could very well argue that they are an American company doing business in France, for that matter.
  Is the business were the server is or where the user is ?
  The point is: France has democratically enacted laws, that could be repelled if the majority of its free citizens wanted so, and those laws state that we have heard enough of some kind of hate speach and want no more, that yes, Jews were killed en masse because they were Jews during WWII among other matters; I am not especially found of those laws but I am ever less found of those who baffle them.
  Anyway, it's the Law here, and I find it very disurbing that Twitter, which does whatever the US government asks it, refuses to comply with French laws about French matters.
  It goes with Twitter as with Google and Facebook and so on: reliance on those foreign services is a threat to our laws and freedom and sovereignty. I would feel much much more at ease if those were based on GPLed, self-hosted decentralized infrastructures and if their business models were not based on customers spying.
2. Re:Twitter should say... by Cali+Thalen · 2013-03-22 10:10 · Score: 1
  
  Dear Twitter:
  Please comply with French law. If any of the bits you send out on the internet could be in any way construed as hateful to any kind of person who might be a French citizen, please make sure those bits don't arrive in France. But all the other bits are fine, keep 'em coming.
  
  --
  Chaos, panic, disorder...my work here is done.
3. Re:Twitter should say... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 11:17 · Score: 1
  
  I'd like to see them reply with a tweet:
  @France: What makes you think we care? #JurisdictionsFTW #PoliceYourOwnDamnCountry #USArmyIsBiggerThanYours #WeveCausedRegimeChanges
4. Re:Twitter should say... by gurps_npc · 2013-03-25 02:07 · Score: 1
  
  My entire point is that the argument you gave is garbage. Governments can not force a company to abide by their laws based on the fact that a citizen used their service. The location of the user is irrelevant and not under the company's control and NOT the company's responsibility.
  You (and France) do not have the right to tell Twitter where they are doing business. Twitter decides where Twitter does business. In truth, the location of the server is actually irrelevant (let alone the user). You can outsource your server - although it is unwise to do so into a country where you do not do business. You could put your servers in international waters, but it wouldn't matter. What matters is where you claim to do business. Twitter can claim to do business in the US only. It is their right.
  Similarly France does has the right to block twitter (which I expressly said in my original post)
  As for France's laws, they are fine for french people. They can't enforce their laws outside of their country. Twitter has the right to say screw you France, we don't want your business.
  Just as France has the right to block Twitter.
  There is a separate question as to whether they SHOULD do that. It may not be in the best interest of France to block twitter, similarly it may not be in the best interest of Twitter to risk losing France's business.
  But in either case, France has no business (just as the US has no business) telling foreign companies what they can and can not do.
  
  --
  excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
In other news... by srussia · 2013-03-22 07:29 · Score: 5, Funny

France's nuclear power infrastructure can now be decommissioned, as they have coupled all the turbine generators to Voltaire's grave.

--
Set your phasers on "funky"!
1. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:42 · Score: 0
  
  France's nuclear power infrastructure can now be decommissioned, as they have coupled all the turbine generators to Voltaire's grave.
  Is it still funny if I had do research I laughed?
2. Re:In other news... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2013-03-22 07:56 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Given that it's Voltaire we're talking about, perhaps it would have sufficed to just connect the electrodes...but I'll be candid with you, regarding your optimism, are you sure they'd also get the necessary amperage?
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
3. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:58 · Score: 0
  
  Legendary sir. If i had mod points you would have them all.
4. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:59 · Score: 0
  
  Didn't the officials of the time hate Voltaire? I imagine he got used to this sort of shit while he was alive.
  People usually don't make memorable quotes about issues they take for granted. They make bold argumentative statements about contentious issues, and we keep the ones that were right.
5. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:19 · Score: 0
  
  no one is going to get any of those jokes sorry :(
6. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:25 · Score: 0
  
  I think you're thinking of the wrong person. Voltaire was a writer and a philosopher during the Enlightenment. Allesandro Volta was the guy whom the unit of electric potential was named after.
7. Re:In other news... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2013-03-22 09:12 · Score: 1
  
  I've known the life and works of Volta since I was ten, thank you very much. Now, the substring is still there, and you obviously got the joke, so I'll silently assume that you're just nitpicking.
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
8. Re:In other news... by CanHasDIY · 2013-03-22 09:57 · Score: 1
  
  Just because you don't get it, doesn't mean nobody else does, Plebe.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
9. Re:In other news... by sourcerror · 2013-03-22 10:30 · Score: 1
  
  I think a big WOOSH is very well deserved:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candide
twitter is a public company by schneidafunk · 2013-03-22 07:30 · Score: 1

While I commend this action, I am afraid that share holders may be upset with twitter taking a $50 million hit for their morals.

--
Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
1. Re:twitter is a public company by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:33 · Score: 0
  
  Twitter won't pay a cent. Who will make them?
2. Re:twitter is a public company by Zero__Kelvin · 2013-03-22 07:34 · Score: 1
  
  What $50 Million dollar hit? There is no hit. That's the point.
  
  --
  Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
3. Re:twitter is a public company by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:39 · Score: 0
  
  That assumes french courts have any way of forcing twitter to pay out the money. Even if the court rules in the plaintiff's favor, it doesn't necessarily mean that twitter will just shrug and agree that need to pay 50 million.
4. Re:twitter is a public company by BitterOak · 2013-03-22 07:52 · Score: 1
  
  While I commend this action, I am afraid that share holders may be upset with twitter taking a $50 million hit for their morals.
  $50 million is nothing compared to the revenue they may lose if people no longer trust it as a place where they can post things without repercussions from foreign powers. (Although, to be honest, I don't really know what their revenues are or where they come from.)
  
  --
  If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
5. Re:twitter is a public company by Chris+Mattern · 2013-03-22 08:06 · Score: 1
  
  What $50 million hit? How is France going to enforce a judgment (which they haven't even won yet, as a matter of fact)? "Pay us $50 million or we will make very angry faces at you."
6. Re:twitter is a public company by CanHasDIY · 2013-03-22 09:58 · Score: 1
  
  What $50 million hit? How is France going to enforce a judgment (which they haven't even won yet, as a matter of fact)? "Pay us $50 million or we will make very angry faces at you."
  Yup, nothing to worry about, at least until they start flinging barnyard animals in your general direction.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
7. Re:twitter is a public company by sjames · 2013-03-22 13:57 · Score: 1
  
  But they might taunt them a second time!
Silly french.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:32 · Score: 0, Funny

Twitter's official response should be "We fart in your general direction you filthy French canigits."
1. Re:Silly french.... by CanHasDIY · 2013-03-22 09:59 · Score: 1
  
  Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries!
  Hey, now, that's just uncalled for!
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Make it like state sales tax by sunking2 · 2013-03-22 07:33 · Score: 1

If Twitter has any sort of physical presence in the country then they should have to follow their laws, be it offices, servers, sales people operating, etc.
1. Re:Make it like state sales tax by mjwalshe · 2013-03-22 07:39 · Score: 1
  
  um in the entire EU - there are such things as EU arrest warrants and France has a inquisitorial system of Justice
2. Re:Make it like state sales tax by gstoddart · 2013-03-22 08:08 · Score: 1
  
  and France has a inquisitorial system of Justice
  NOBODY expects the inquisitorial system of justice ... ;-)
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
3. Re:Make it like state sales tax by Chris+Mattern · 2013-03-22 08:10 · Score: 1
  
  there are such things as EU arrest warrants
  But you can't use them for this. EU arrest warrants can only be issued for criminal prosecutions or enforcing custodial sentences. If it doesn't involve being sent to prison for at least a year, they won't issue one.
4. Re:Make it like state sales tax by mjwalshe · 2013-03-22 08:39 · Score: 1
  
  Amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to johnny hallyday.
5. Re:Make it like state sales tax by mjwalshe · 2013-03-22 08:44 · Score: 1
  
  Some countrys have been issuing them for trial offenses such as "possession of 3 ecstasy tablets, theft of two car tyres, driving under the influence of alcohol where the limit was not significantly exceeded and theft of a piglet"
6. Re:Make it like state sales tax by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:17 · Score: 0
  
  And sweden will issue one if you are a person of interest
7. Re:Make it like state sales tax by Chris+Mattern · 2013-03-22 14:24 · Score: 1
  
  Sweden *can't* issue one--it takes the EU to issue one. That's why it's an "EU arrest warrant". No such warrant has been issued for Assange. Sweden got England's agreement to render him over not by having such a warrant--if they'd had such a warrant there'd have been no court hearings at all, they'd just have arrested him and carted him off--but by the old fashioned method of getting him extradited.
Twitter said no, get over it... once again by Trax3001BBS · 2013-03-22 07:34 · Score: 1

I always post to the wrong one. so again.
I read Twitters TOS as listed today (Mar 22 2013)
"We also reserve the right to access, read, preserve, and disclose any information as we reasonably
believe is necessary to (i) satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or governmental request..."
https://twitter.com/tos [twitter.com]
Reading the translated article then wikipedia. The case was heard and judged by the
Tribunal de Grande Instance of Paris (Google Translate) a minor jurisdiction, that hears hears minor civil cases.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_France [wikipedia.org]
http://books.google.com/books?id=hJaEzC1CBe8C&pg=PA153#v=onepage&q&f=false [google.com]
I would think Twitter has the right not to acknowledge this court as being applicable or relevant.
Again Twitter TOS
"(iv) respond to user support requests,
They said no, enforcing their TOS of
"(v) protect the rights, property or safety of Twitter, its users and the public."
I'm sure it says no hateful comments somewhere but at the most the guilty persons account be deleted.
I'm not surprised that this didn't happen sooner.. by Mashiki · 2013-03-22 07:35 · Score: 5, Insightful

After all most countries in the EU have similar law, Canada has similar laws(still) since the bill to strike down various parts of the hate speech laws are still stuck in the senate. The US is the odd ball out. Remember the next time someone starts screaming that hate speech laws are a good idea, they're not. This is spoken by someone who already lives under them. You have no "freedom of expression," you have limited expression as deemed by the government in a very and exceptionally narrowing scope as deemed by unelected bureaucrats in HRC's(human rights councils) who run tribunals outside the court system.

--
Om, nomnomnom...
Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by lobiusmoop · 2013-03-22 07:35 · Score: 1

Al Jazeera, the Arabic news channel, is broadcast across most of Europe. Can France take action against it if it broadcasts any anti-Israeli material?

--
"I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
1. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:51 · Score: 1
  
  Anti-Israeli is not at all the same thing as anti-Semitic.
  Anti-Israeli material is directed against the policies of a nation or its government.
  Anti-Semitic material (despite the broad name) is racist stuff directed at Jews in general.
2. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by h4rr4r · 2013-03-22 08:02 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Anti-Israeli is not the same as anti-Semitic.
  Surely you can see the difference? Just like one might protest the actions of the US government while holding no ill will towards her people.
3. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:57 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Anti-Israeli is not at all the same thing as anti-Semitic.
  Anti-Israeli material is directed against the policies of a nation or its government.
  Anti-Semitic material (despite the broad name) is racist stuff directed at Jews in general.
  No. Arabs and many other people belong to Semitic people too. Anti-Semitic term is widely misused and it should stop.
  The correct term would be Anti-Sionistic when its against Jews and Israel (state).
4. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:42 · Score: 0
  
  That's the Etymological fallacy.
  The way the word Anti-Semitic is used is what matters, not where it originally came from.
  And it's some weird sort of excuse to claim that all prejudice against Jews is due to Zionism.
5. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by alexo · 2013-03-22 12:30 · Score: 1
  
  Arabs and many other people belong to Semitic people too. Anti-Semitic term is widely misused and it should stop.
  There are many countries on the American continent, yet the English word "Americans" applies only to people from the US.
  The term "antisemitism" (a single word is a common spelling) was created to mean hatred of Jews. The fact that it is not etymologically perfect is beside the point.
  
  The correct term would be Anti-Sionistic when its against Jews and Israel (state).
  Applicable, perhaps, to the state of Israel but not to the Jewish people. Zionism is an ideology, there are non-Zionist Jews and even anti-Zionist ones.
6. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 13:08 · Score: 0
  
  Anti-Israeli is not the same as anti-Semitic.
  Surely you can see the difference? Just like one might protest the actions of the US government while holding no ill will towards her people.
  You know that Islam is also a semitic religion, right?
7. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 14:14 · Score: 0
  
  Anti-Israeli is not the same as anti-Semitic.
  They are of course different. But then you've got people who'll swear up and down they are not anti-Semitic but are instead anti-Israel/anti-Zionist and then they proceed to spew forth typical anti-Semitic bullshit. Once you see enough people like this you'll begin to be quite skeptical about people claiming that they are not anti-Semitic.
8. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by KiloByte · 2013-03-22 14:18 · Score: 1
  
  WTF? "anti-Sionistic" meaning "being against Jews"? Who the hell upmodded this twice?
  
  --
  The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
9. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 19:44 · Score: 0
  
  In France, for zionists (politics) and sayanims (Israeli's worldwide agents e.g. Bernard Henry Levy the one who launched war in Lybia) it is the exact same thing, they even try to brainwash people by making them believe that being anti-zionist will lead to become antisemitic ! I say it proud : I AM ANTI-JUDAIC (simply look at their value system it's full of hatred. cf. Talmud). They can kiss my Catholic a** !
10. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by Dr.Aiguille · 2013-03-22 20:13 · Score: 1
  
  In France it does ! They brainwash people daily through mainstream media, every single week you can easily hear them crying and getting mad talking about the Holocaust like it happened yesterday. Recently a so-called journalist of BFMTV, Frédéric Haziza insulted people who criticized Israel and then declared that his grandfather was dead in Auschwitz which appears to be a freakin' lie (the guy is a Sephardi Jew, not an Ashkenazi Jew (did I just wrote Nazi ??) and they were ALL in Maghreb at this period of time)...same for Elie Wiesel who built a career on the exact same lie and gets paid 20,000€ a conference... !!!!
11. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by Dr.Aiguille · 2013-03-22 20:44 · Score: 1
  
  You are completely wrong ! Anti-Semitic has no semantic value AT ALL ! Most of the people called Anti-Semitic nowadays are simply Anti-JUDAIC, which is directed against a value system preached in the Talmud : hatred, racism, tribalism ! Ask yourself why Judaism is the only religion which is transmitted by the blood of the mother ???? Judaism is a racial and communitarianist supremacism, in the name of an unequal and racial worldview which can be accomplished whether by direct violence (as it is referred in Purim fest and Hanukkah fest), or by robbing others (e.g: Palestine) ! So it is kinda strange to say people are racists against "the chosen ones" since they are the most racist people on Earth ! In the Talmud, all non-Jews (Goys) are called animals and are often compared to dogs, pigs etc...
12. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by KiloByte · 2013-03-23 01:43 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, a vast majority of guys you're talking about are authentic antisemites. Wanting to deny others the right to live, and wipe a whole country off the face of Earth just because they don't want to submit to shariah is, well, not nice, too.
  
  --
  The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
13. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by gale+the+simple · 2013-03-23 02:04 · Score: 1
  
  I actually agree. Unfortunately, most people cannot get past nuance.
  
  --
  This post is provided without warranty as to reliability, accuracy or otherwise or fitness for any particular purpose.
14. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by gale+the+simple · 2013-03-23 02:07 · Score: 1
  
  Words are what they users of the language think they are and/or mean. Besides, I do not think most people understand the distinction anyway.
  
  --
  This post is provided without warranty as to reliability, accuracy or otherwise or fitness for any particular purpose.
15. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 03:17 · Score: 0
  
  This is an old and hackney'd argument. Despite the fact that Arabs fit under the broad category of "Semites," the term "Anti-Semitism" was specifically created with the meaning of being against the Jews, and the word Semitism also was strictly related to the Jews at the time the word was crafted. So no, Anti-Semitism has not been misused except to try to include Arabs under it.
16. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-24 20:41 · Score: 0
  
  Agree with that. Jews are fine. Israel is a cockwaffle.
17. Re:Do TV Broadcasters Have to Put Up With This? by Dr.Aiguille · 2013-03-26 08:39 · Score: 1
  
  I suggest you to read "The Wandering Who" by Gilad Atzmon, an authentic Israeli Jew to understand everything about zionist and anti-zionist movements ! The real Semite people are Arabs....Ashkenazi Jews are from eastern Europe and ARE NOT AT ALL Semite !
I agree by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:35 · Score: 0

Twitter argues it only needs to comply with U.S. laws
And it's a solid argument, if France doesn't like it they have the power to block twitter nationwide.
It's a shame it doesn't work the other way around around though, as the US would never accept that answer.
I'm curious to see how this unfolds.
It seems pretty straight forward to me by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:36 · Score: 0

If the offending party is in the country in question and they are using the service to break the laws of that country, then their information should be turned over as long as a legal request to do so has been filed. If the perpetrator is not physically in that country and the service provider, in this case Twitter, doesn't occupy a physical space in that country, then they have no obligation to comply. Of course, then the issue of "good" nations version "bad" nations arises where the laws strictly forbid speech against the regime or what-not and a lot of our tech companies have openly flouted such requests, so I guess it's really open to interpretation.
1. Re:It seems pretty straight forward to me by Lazere · 2013-03-22 08:08 · Score: 1
  
  So, you're saying that France should be able to file random requests against speech they don't like on twitter until they randomly hit on somebody from France? Seems like something that could be easily abused, don't you think?
oy vey! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:38 · Score: 0

It's like another Shoah!
yep... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:41 · Score: 0

And that's how the great firewall of France was started...
1. Re:yep... by Hognoxious · 2013-03-22 23:07 · Score: 1
  
  I wonder if they'll miss out the section from Luxembourg to the channel.
  Again.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
mega lol by slashmydots · 2013-03-22 07:44 · Score: 1

A fairly recent survey found the group of people who have the lowest opinion of the French people are the French people themselves. So, aren't they all taking to Twitter to complain about French people and violating their own law? Racism is racism, lol.
1. Re:mega lol by Hognoxious · 2013-03-22 23:15 · Score: 1
  
  A fairly recent survey found the group of people who have the lowest opinion of the French people are the French people themselves.
  
  Presumably the people who did this survey forgot to ask the British.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I WIPE MY ASS WITH A 360-720 DEGREE FLOOR SPIN by MillionthMonkey · 2013-03-22 07:44 · Score: 1

My cousin is going through boxes in the garage to get all my dead uncle's "I HATE FRANCE" shirts. We're selling them online once the washing machine finally gets the meth sweat.

This has damaged my relationship with my French bulldog as well. She is contacting her lawyer in Paris after having seen a picture of herself holding a demeaning sign online.
Self-identification by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:45 · Score: 0

Stand down, Twitter. The French government is a role model for tolerance.
How about if. . . by smooth+wombat · 2013-03-22 07:47 · Score: 1

we identify all the Semitic users. That way the anti-Semitic people will know who to direct their tweets to. ~

--
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
1. Re:How about if. . . by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 19:48 · Score: 0
  
  lol we can't they will directly say that doing such a thing IS actually Anti-Semitic !
  The worst....this was not irony this is the truth !
Go Twitter by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:50 · Score: 0

Otherwise next thing would be Saudi Arabia demanding blasphemers be identified for beheading.
Local physical presence? by fahrbot-bot · 2013-03-22 07:56 · Score: 1

Does Twitter have a physical presence in France? If not, then the French government can fuck off. If they don't like it, they can block Twitter access to their citizens - I'm sure that will go over well....

--
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Why censor racists? by drdaz · 2013-03-22 07:58 · Score: 2

I've never understood the motivation in censoring racism online.
Posting slurs on Twitter is one of the least harmful things these morons could be spending their time doing.
1. Re:Why censor racists? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:24 · Score: 0
  
  I've never understood the motivation in censoring racism online.
  Posting slurs on Twitter is one of the least harmful things these morons could be spending their time doing.
  Agreed. Much better is to make sure the racism is very public and follows the person around online.
  Ideally, it should not be possible to do a Google search on the person's name and NOT see the racist comments.
  That will help all of us make a better decisions about if/when/how we wish to associate with that individual.
2. Re:Why censor racists? by PPH · 2013-03-22 11:14 · Score: 1
  
  Posted AC?
  It sounds highly noble to attach racist comments to their originators. But what about other political speech? Or whistle-blowers and other informants? In certain regimes, expressing opposing views can be labeled as a sort of hate speech and draw the same scrutiny that these anti-Semitic comments are drawing in France.
  
  --
  Have gnu, will travel.
Twitter should... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:59 · Score: 0

countersue the French government under U.S. SLAPP laws. If France says they don't have jurisdiction, Twitter should say, "exactly."
I see london I see france by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:01 · Score: 0

I see your dreidel embossed underpants.
What we should do is ask North Korean dictators what is acceptable behavior for people living in other countries and sue (or execute) anyone who would dare make Mr fat face grimace. Who knows perhaps %0.0001 of those proceeds might be used to feed starving citizens...anything is possible.
Re:Fuck the French, and fuck the Jews too. by erroneus · 2013-03-22 08:01 · Score: 1

Seconded. And I'll add to that to say that a nation's laws should only extend to the borders of the nation. I am personally ashamed of my nation (the USA) for its trickery, manipulation and deceit in trying to extend and expand its laws (at the request of business) to other nations.
I hold that everyone who hates me is completely entitled to hate me. Call me names. Say what you like about my opinions and the things I do. (So long as they are the truth with evidence or are merely opinion.) As a US American, I believe in the constitution as it was written and that the freedom of speech [especially] covers unpopular speech. So screw the Jewish (leaders... I love the people actually) for attempting to trample and silence free speech.
We have seen concession after concession made on behalf of France by internet companies all over. It's about time someone brought this to a stop and fought back.
As far as I'm concerned, this is the first useful thing Twitter has done. I hope they prevail. Of course the court will likely be a French court and the liklihood that Twitter will even appear is, I'm guessing pretty low. How this all plays out will be very interesting. In previous cases which were similar in nature, Twitter rolled over. I hope this will end very differently.
Of course, I think this is Twitter realizing it is a major media entity now and should begin acting like one.
Re:I'm not surprised that this didn't happen soone by myrikhan · 2013-03-22 08:01 · Score: 2

This is spoken by someone who already lives under them. You have no "freedom of expression," you have limited expression as deemed by the government in a very and exceptionally narrowing scope as deemed by unelected bureaucrats in HRC's(human rights councils) who run tribunals outside the court system.
Taken from http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2013/03/17/supreme_court_reaffirmed_canadian_balance_on_free_speech_siddiqui.html

Anti-hate laws undermine free speech.

No, said the court, they “appropriately balance . . . freedom of expression with competing Charter rights and other values — a commitment to equality and respect for group identity and the inherent dignity owed to all human beings.”

Anti-hate laws breed political correctness, stifle debate.

No, “hate speech legislation is not aimed at discouraging repugnant or offensive ideas. It does not, for example, prohibit expression which debates the merits of reducing the rights of vulnerable groups. It only restricts the use of expression exposing them to hatred.”

Hate speech is hard to define.

The judges have defined it — as that which “a reasonable person, aware of the context and circumstances, would view the expression as likely to expose a person or persons to detestation and vilification on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.” They also provided “a workable approach” to combating it.

Apply the rules “objectively” (their emphasis).

Interpret “hatred and contempt” “as being restricted to those extreme manifestations of the emotion described by the words ‘detestation’ and ‘vilification.’ This filters out expression which, while repugnant and offensive, does not incite the level of abhorrence, delegitimization and rejection that risks causing discrimination or other harmful effects.”

Look to the effect of hate speech on the target. “Is the expression likely to expose the targeted person or group to hatred by others?”

A no-holds-barred debate may hurt but it does not harm anyone.

“Preventive measures do not require proof of actual harm. The discriminatory effects of hate speech are part of the everyday knowledge and experience of Canadians.”

Provocateurs do not mean to malign the group they attack.

Good try, but “allowing the dissemination of hate speech to be excused by a sincerely held belief would, in effect, provide an absolute defence and would gut the prohibition of effectiveness.”

The court could have added that human rights codes are not the only limitation on free speech.

Libel laws don’t allow writers to say whatever they want about, say, Conrad Black. Why is that chill less corrosive of free speech than anti-hate laws? Are minorities less worthy of legal protection?

The Criminal Code, too, limits free speech. I may be marched off to jail for up to two years if convicted of spreading hate. Granted, the bar to prosecute is higher there than under human rights codes. Still, it makes no sense to criminalize speech and jail people for their words, rather than merely imposing a fine on them.
Re:I'm not surprised that this didn't happen soone by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:07 · Score: 1

Oh please.
Almost noone in France or Germany is affected by these laws in any way shape or form. The vast majority of people isn't even aware of these laws (which isn't a good thing by itself, but it does show how little of a deal this law is to most people).
If your definition for "freedom of expression" really is absolute freedom (as your post seems to imply) then there is no country on earth that i'm aware of, offering freedom of expression (certainly not the USA). Sure, the US doesn't have hate speech laws like many European countries (mostly a mark left by the second worldwar being fought on their own soil as opposed to as a war overseas), but there are tons of examples of US laws that impede freedom of speech/expression in the very same way (and for good reasons). Popular examples include yelling fire in a cinema, telling people you're gonna kill the president, disturbing the peace laws and so forth.
I remember seeing a movie a long time ago with Bruce willis in it, i think it was "Die Hard with a Vengeance" in which Bruce Willis ended up standing in harlem wearing a big sign on his chest saying something like "I Hate ". Ofcourse it didn't take long for a fight to erupt there, as it would in real life, both in the states and most of europe.
Nobody in his right mind considers this a healthy use of freedom of speech, in the US the police would pick that person up for disturbing the peace or some other dubious charge (even if only to break up the uproar for a few hours and then kick the person loose). In France (or germany or most other countries) the exact same thing will happen except the law used to do so is considered a hatespeech law.
Hate speech laws are problematic in an academic sense, and i do agree that a government broadening the definition of exactly what constitutes hatespeech to serve itself is a valid concern, but the current implementation of hate speech laws as seen in Western Europe are fairly harmless and not likely to result in people being censored without real cause.
I'm sure there are some examples of these laws being misapplied or abused (just as with any other law), but that's more of a problem with the people in power.
Censorship by country by sl4shd0rk · 2013-03-22 08:09 · Score: 1

The political environment added with each countries customs and beliefs will not let them just say "oh hah.. lol sorry, forgot it's the interenetz!"
Afghanistan/Iran and other countries already censor. Many will follow. It's the only logical, but unfortunate, recourse a country has over something they cannot otherwise control. Or, you just make your own state-sponsored trucks 'n tubes

--
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
Perfect solution by Brett+Buck · 2013-03-22 08:09 · Score: 3, Insightful

Google could just purchase Italy outright. I hear it will be rather a bargain. Problem solved!
1. Re:Perfect solution by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:36 · Score: 0
  
  The deal comes with a Ferrari, a Lamborghini and some Fiats.
2. Re:Perfect solution by preaction · 2013-03-22 08:52 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  Luigi only like the Ferraris
3. Re:Perfect solution by xevioso · 2013-03-22 11:36 · Score: 1
  
  And a Pope!
4. Re:Perfect solution by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 11:52 · Score: 0
  
  Google could just purchase Italy outright. I hear it will be rather a bargain. Problem solved!
  Except you gotta take Greece, too. It's a package deal.
5. Re:Perfect solution by quenda · 2013-03-22 13:03 · Score: 1
  
  Google could just purchase Italy outright. I hear it will be rather a bargain.
  Its like buying one of those $1 houses in America that have taxes owing - Italy comes with a lot of debt to service: $2.6 trillion, compared to Google's $0.26 trillion market cap.
  Even google will have trouble finding $130 billion/year in interest payments. Maybe they could go halfsies with Apple.
6. Re:Perfect solution by marcosdumay · 2013-03-22 13:51 · Score: 1
  
  No, the Pope is within the package, but you don't get possession. I guess its one of those licensing agreements.
  
  --
  Rethinking email
7. Re:Perfect solution by hcs_$reboot · 2013-03-22 16:01 · Score: 1
  
  Google could just purchase Italy outright. I hear it will be rather a bargain. Problem solved!
  Come on. If Italy was for sale it'd had been purchased by China or Qatar long ago.
  
  --
  Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
8. Re:Perfect solution by Maritz · 2013-03-23 03:29 · Score: 1
  
  Luigi only like-a da Ferraris. Translated that to Italian for you.
  
  --
  I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
It's not racism... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:10 · Score: 0, Troll

...because there is no such a thing as a "jewish race".
1. Re:It's not racism... by oh_my_080980980 · 2013-03-22 08:23 · Score: 1
  
  Hebrew?
2. Re:It's not racism... by Arker · 2013-03-22 10:08 · Score: 1
  
  ...because there is no such a thing as a "jewish race".
  
  Hebrew?
  Human.
  
  --
  =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
  Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
3. Re:It's not racism... by Hognoxious · 2013-03-22 23:20 · Score: 1
  
  Possibly. Beer is kosher, as long as you don't use pulped fish giblets as a flocculating agent.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
A Couple of Questions Come To My Mind: by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:11 · Score: 0

First, why is it better for me to not know who around me is bigotted, and how bigotted, and, more important, how virulent in his or her bigotry? Am I better served by bigots being silenced? Does silencing bigots defuse their bigotry? Make their antagonism subside? Reduce their angers to milder forms, as conversations can?
Second, what constitutes "hate speech"? Does bigotry play in the definitions? Are standards the same, for example, for "anti-semitism" expressed against Jews as for "anti-semetism" expressed against Arabs, the "other Semites"? For expressions by Semites, expresing bigotry against non-Semites? Are bigotted remarks by Semites not anti-semitic" for reflecting lack of taste and intelligence by the expressing Semite (to say nothing of hypocrisy if the expresser inclines also to accuse "antisemiticism")?
Free-speech is simpler, if nothing else, since it doesn't require a lawyer to sift and sort and grade the shades of. With free speech I can do it myself, by ear.
1. Re:A Couple of Questions Come To My Mind: by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 11:04 · Score: 0
  
  Anti-Semitism is against Jews, not against other Semitic peoples.
  Sorry, that's the way the language has happened.
Why? by Arkh89 · 2013-03-22 08:15 · Score: 1

Because Twitter is registered in France, thus they are liable (or at least Twitter France SAS is). http://www.societe.com/societe/twitter-france-sas-789305596.html [In french, registration numbers are the RCS and the SIRET]
1. Re:Why? by oh_my_080980980 · 2013-03-22 08:20 · Score: 1
  
  And where are the servers located? If they are in France I think France has a better chance at enforcement. If not good luck and you might want to pick up some Voltaire. Sad that the UEJF is not familiar with Voltaire.
When will it be ok? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:27 · Score: 1

I am sephardic jew my family has lived in latin america for around 500 years and I have seen the local natives gone through horrible things, well just in argentina they're the only ones who want to make the country white. Brown is ok in all the other countries. And I want to know when will be OK for people to make fun or say things about the jews. There are other ethniticies that had gone through harder and still going through worst things than the Jewish population has endured, but somehow we have to be very carefull when the Jew subject appears.
1. Re:When will it be ok? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 11:03 · Score: 0
  
  but somehow we have to be very carefull when the Jew subject appears.
  Jews think they own the IP right to suffering and being oppressed. Whether they do or not, I'm not sure. But they do have the best lawyers.
Presence by Githaron · 2013-03-22 08:31 · Score: 1

Does Twitter even have a physical/legal presence in France? It not, the most France can do is force its ISPs to block Twitter and I find that unlikely.
Oh no! Next comes... by niaxilin · 2013-03-22 08:38 · Score: 1

...riots and storming of the US embassy! Let's not mess it up this time like in Benghazi, or we'll have to find a another new Secretary of State.
Freedom from government and corporations by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:44 · Score: 0

We (the 99%) need a form of global communication that cannot be controlled by governments or corporations. Both have shown themselves to be enemies of the individual.
Freenet and tor are both good starts, the next step is to de-couple the physical communication medium from govcorp contro.
Fight hard. by pubwvj · 2013-03-22 08:46 · Score: 1

Twitter, and all companies and people, should fight this sort of power grab by France hard. France is a fool to try this. If Iran uses this logic the French would scream bloody murder.
Terms of use? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:48 · Score: 0

In the terms of use, it's likely that the French customers viewing Twitter agree to abide by US law.
Which says they agreed to not be bothered by things that are ok in the US.
If this is the case, the who in France has the right to bring suit in the first place?
can't have it both ways by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:53 · Score: 0

So the US believes the world served by the internet must conform to their copyright law and websites/organizations hosted in countries with different laws can't hide behind the legislation in their home countries, but cries foul when another country tries to do the same.
US has looser laws with regards to freedom of speech, and Twitter wants to hide behind US legislation citing the first amendment. US goes after "illegal" (if it were hosted in the US) download sites, and insists ITS laws are what matter.
You can't have it both ways, guys. US law isn't world law. Not even taking sides here. Either Twitter should divulge the users due to French law, or US should tell its lobbyists to sit and spin where foreign piracy is concerned since the host site is protected by the laws in that country.
Censorship more dangerous than 'hate speech' by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:58 · Score: 0

Glenn Greenwald wrote a remarkably insightful column in the Guardian concerning this case.
Fuck France. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:03 · Score: 0

That is all.
UPDATE by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:04 · Score: 0

this is now know in the mainstream is "Taylor Swifting" - Which is soooo late 2012
Totally awesome by nauseous · 2013-03-22 09:09 · Score: 0

Do I get to sue for listening to this BS?
Oh yeah? by interval1066 · 2013-03-22 09:16 · Score: 1

And Isreal wonders why the rest of the world hates Israel so much...

--
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
1. Re:Oh yeah? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 18:16 · Score: 0
  
  Sweetie, Jews stopped wondering why Christians and Muslims hated them so much a millenium or two ago, hsrugged their shoulders, and accepted that religions are full of random nonsense that doesn't make sense to outsiders. As for "the rest of the world", outside your tiny little horizon, they really don't see what the fuss is about, just some internal squabble between sects of Jhwhists.
jews by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:17 · Score: 0

filthy kikes always trying to suppress speech to hide their many crimes , always trying to take the goyim rights away hitler was right
1. Re:jews by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:51 · Score: 0
  
  But its the frogs that are suing.
test by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:23 · Score: 0

ignore this. testing flagging and moderation.
Google Has Complied by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:24 · Score: 0

With local laws, so the precedent is there.
Twitter doesn't have to comply of course, but thy can be barred from doing business there..
1. Re:Google Has Complied by PPH · 2013-03-22 10:56 · Score: 1
  
  Where is Twitter located?
  If not in France, then its the French citizens that might be breaking the law. 'Might', because I'm not certain how French law extends to its citizens behavior doing business outside its borders.
  
  --
  Have gnu, will travel.
Re:I'm not surprised that this didn't happen soone by khallow · 2013-03-22 09:30 · Score: 1

As I see it, the only "balance" possible in this situation is to remove the hate speech laws. Canadian courts and tribunals are notorious for living in a fantasy land where crap law miraculously transforms into just law. The key problem:

Hate speech is hard to define.

The judges have defined it â" as that which âoea reasonable person, aware of the context and circumstances, would view the expression as likely to expose a person or persons to detestation and vilification on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.â They also provided âoea workable approachâ to combating it.
Why would a reasonable person ever make this determination? The detestation and vilification is already there. It doesn't go away merely because you've criminalized playground language and certain conspiracy theories.
France scared of Anonymous Coward by istartedi · 2013-03-22 09:31 · Score: 1

France is scared of Anonymous Cowards. The jokes just write themselves these days, all over the EU. Don't get me started on Cyprus, really... well, isn't somebody going to get me started? /Crusty.

--
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Re:I'm not surprised that this didn't happen soone by Mashiki · 2013-03-22 09:45 · Score: 1

Right, this is the end result of hate speech laws. They become political tools, especially when "offending" a particular group may come into play.

--
Om, nomnomnom...
If Twitter loses by futhermocker · 2013-03-22 09:46 · Score: 2

They should pay the fine in batches of 140 single cents.

--
KERNEL PANIC -SIGFAULT AT ADDRESS #51A54D07
Re:I'm not surprised that this didn't happen soone by Kjella · 2013-03-22 09:48 · Score: 1

You have no "freedom of expression," you have limited expression as deemed by the government in a very and exceptionally narrowing scope
Seriously, have you looked at far left/right/wacky websites lately and seen what kind of drivel is within the law? The kind of things that are picked up by the police usually goes far beyond just derogatory and insulting and far more towards thinly veiled threats like "Hitler should have finished the job." (Also, thread officially Godwin'd) Many of the loony toons want to rid themselves of democracy because they claim the system is corrupted by their enemies and want to lead an armed revolt against the majority on behalf of the "true" inhabitants and conduct mass deportation, mass revocation of civil rights or genocide. Except for the religious wackos who want to install a theocracy in the first place and kill off all other religions any way they can. Many controversial characters have received death threats and live under police protection but very few convicted of hate speech.

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Re:I'm not surprised that this didn't happen soone by Mashiki · 2013-03-22 09:56 · Score: 1

Seriously, have you looked at far left/right/wacky websites lately and seen what kind of drivel is within the law?
You mean like the law turning a blind eye when people actually advocate that stuff until they flee the country? Right, see my post above, oh and that's not the first time either. Don't be so ignorant. Of course you could always go to hmm was it Norway or Denmark? Where a fellow had a Quran thrown at him by muslims, while being insulted and berated by them, so he ripped it. And he was the one charged with the hate crime.

--
Om, nomnomnom...
Re:I'm not surprised that this didn't happen soone by mooingyak · 2013-03-22 10:24 · Score: 1

Popular examples include yelling fire in a cinema, telling people you're gonna kill the president, disturbing the peace laws and so forth.
These largely cover cases where speech is also action.
Disturbing the peace is the most obvious example. If I park myself in front of a few houses at 3AM and start shouting completely innocuous things (I LIKE PONIES! ROY G BIV TELLS YOU THE COLORS OF THE RAINBOW!) into a megaphone, the problem isn't with the content. The problem is that I'm a noisy pain in the ass while people are trying to sleep.
It's a restriction on free speech only when the words themselves are the problem.

--
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
wrong information by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:53 · Score: 0

Sorry i am far to be fluent but the given information is FALSE , and some comments are ridiculous just because the people who write them didn't even tried to understand.
First of all : The author doesn't understand anything about french Law and you give wrong information : Twitter sued for $50M.
I know little about french law but it seems really weird to me, in France you don't get Million because your coffe was served to hot ( I know this is a cliché but then you can understand what a cliché is... ) so the $50M sounds really weird to me.
So i tried to read more about it here is what i understood, once again i knew nothing about law.
There is two kind of lawsuit in France :
Civil wich is just between 2 people or in this case two organisation Twitter and the UEJF ( wich i can translate to French Jew Student Union).
In the case the UEJF won then they should had hire an american lawyer in order to had the french court decision applied to an american court.
You can NOT get jail time in civil court.
And the UEJF knows that because of 1st amendment the will never won in an american court.
So they decided to switch to penal system wich is a another kind of court where there is
Twitter : the defender
UEJF : the offended (not sure it's well translated )
and the prosecutor wich reprensent the society (the state).
You can get jail time in penal court.
But here is the important point in the case UEJF won .The decision ruled by the penal court doesn't have to be applied by an american court.
So far Twitter has been ruled to pay 1000 euro per day they refused to give the Ip Adress of the author of the hate speech.
For those who says of twitter being an american company operating in the US.
Twitter sells advertising space in France and has probably a legal structure for that or has some structure to represent them in France.
The only ip adress asked are French ip adress of the author of the hate speech.
And given the stupidity of the wroten message , I really doubt that the author used a VPN or a proxy in order to have an ip adress outside of France.
By the way try to google "free tibet" the next time you go in China , and you will see if American company doesn't apply to local law .....
And for those who likes to do french bashing, yes a decade latter Irak war was a great idea, and we did not support it because it was stupid but because we were cowards.
Wich Ii am, but I am also Anonymous, I am legion, I do not forgive. I do not forget. Expect me.
1. Re:wrong information by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 14:00 · Score: 0
  
  in France you don't get Million because your coffe was served to hot ( I know this is a cliché but then you can understand what a cliché is... )
  Do you understand what an "urban legend" is? Because that's what you're repeating here.
2. Re:wrong information by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 16:55 · Score: 0
  
  Not an urban legend. A woman sued McDonalds for only medical bills, and the jury decided to increase it to a few million.
3. Re:wrong information by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 23:42 · Score: 0
  
  IIRC it was then reduced on appeal. In any case, what she did was stupid and probably a felony in most states so I don't have much sympathy for the stupid bitch.
Antisemetic is almost everything! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:54 · Score: 0

Wow, wonder if they posted anything about the ethnic cleansing of Palestine? Or the US citizen killed in an act of piracy, or a young American woman being bulldozed and backed up over.
Antisemetic is used to keep knowledge of these things from all of us.
Hate, of all types is ugly, but you cannot hide truth behind hate.
Proper Response is... by Eyezen · 2013-03-22 11:12 · Score: 1

#venezobligez-moiÃrÃler
What. The. Fuck....? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 11:25 · Score: 0

No....seriously. Who the fuck do they think they are?
twitter really being sued? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 12:24 · Score: 0

I cannot believe this! What ever happened to freedom of speech?
Psychohistory predicts that this.. by SinisterRainbow · 2013-03-22 12:35 · Score: 1

is one of very early sparks that leads to world governments.

--
-Ultimate Stickman Game Developer Infinite World Puzzler
French judges are a farce by Skapare · 2013-03-22 13:49 · Score: 1

Earlier this year, a French civil court ruled that Twitter needed to identify any users that posted hateful or anti-Semitic messages; on Wednesday, the Union of Jewish French Students (UEJF) sued Twitter [2] for roughly $50 million, claiming the San Francisco-based social network failed to honor that court ruling.
The whole concept of making everyone in every country liable to every other country's laws is just a farce. The French judges who make these rulings are a farce and they turn the whole country of France into a farce. There's no way the world can be safe if this kind of farce is allowed to happen.
In the US a judge that would make such a ruling would be subject to sanctions. So these stupid French judges need to be taken to USA and made subject to the sanctions. A year in jail in a prison in Texas sounds good to me. And they get to work on the chain gang.

--
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
1. Re:French judges are a farce by zzyzyx · 2013-03-22 18:52 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe you aren't aware, but this "farce" is already happening. The USA is extraditing people from the all over the world (UK, New Zealand, Sweden), for actions that are crimes *in the US*, but not in those other countries.
  Also you're suggesting that French judges should be punished for something that would be sanctionable in the US? Are you a troll?
Who Be Dah judge? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 15:17 · Score: 0

Seriously whether a remark is anti-Jewish or not often depends upon who says it and exactly in what context. For example there are people that feel that Israel should not exist as a Jewish state but at the same time are very supportive of the Jewish people. Yet to many Jews being anti-Zionist is taken to be as radically anti-Jewish. It is a dangerous area for law to get involved as it is so often just not clear what is anti and what is pro Jewish. To some Orthodox Jews even helping reform Jews in any way might be seen as anti-Jewish.
tweets en francais ou en englais? by mostlyDigital · 2013-03-22 16:07 · Score: 1

Were they French tweets - originating in France? If not, there's not much of a case. If they were it will be interesting to see whether local laws cover the customers.
Scumbag Soulskill by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 18:29 · Score: 0

Conveniently posts a story defending anti-jewish racists, on a night when it is known that most jews will be offline and thus unable to defend themselves with a counter argument.
Turnabout is fair play by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 19:19 · Score: 0

Surely if the USA can try and extradite Kim Dotcom from New Zealand over breaking one of it's laws for something that's not illegal in NZ, then France can extradte Twitter's CEO for harbouring hate speach.
Dictatorship by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 19:25 · Score: 0

Screw those zionist muppets ! Ppl who voted this law in France are all zionist, pro europe, pro jewish banking system, and most of them are part of Freemasonry !
I personally know someone who went to jail for 1year because he simply PROVED that the gas chambers NEVER EXISTED ! God...help us to save France ! Those dictators need to get the hell out of France !
Vive Robert Faurisson ! Vive Dieudonné ! Vive Alain Soral !
Re:I'm not surprised that this didn't happen soone by Hognoxious · 2013-03-22 22:44 · Score: 1

Bruce Willis ended up standing in harlem wearing a big sign on his chest saying something like "I Hate ". Ofcourse it didn't take long for a fight to erupt there

Wrong on so many levels.
One, Bruce Willis, irrespective of what he's wearing, is more than enough cause for a fight. Two, nobody in Harlem can read. Three, Bruce Willis doesn't wear shirts. Ever.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
yahoo.. and now twitter by gale+the+simple · 2013-03-23 02:01 · Score: 1

Given that France is the place where yahoo has lost its perceived power of teh interwebz precisely over the same crap ( only then people were bidding on nazi memorabilia - forbidden in France ), it will be very interesting to see if twitter folds on that one. I do not see why it should, but France, along Germany, is the country that gives orders in the EU now.
And yahoo caved in...I certainly do hope does not repeat itself; antisemitic content or not.

--
This post is provided without warranty as to reliability, accuracy or otherwise or fitness for any particular purpose.
Two wrongs make one worse wrong by ReallyShortNameLengt · 2013-03-23 09:29 · Score: 1

Racism is wrong. So's invasion of privacy. And all this is doing is turning them into victims. (Wrong is wrong, including when done to someone who's doing wrong) So that's two wrongs and one tactical error. Congratulations, France; if you've ever wondered why some people think you're bad at strategy...
The result by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-24 20:36 · Score: 0

Countries trying to do this need to build their own sensor net a-la great firewall of China, or they will become a dark spot on the internet. Nobody will risk launching their service in those countries.
France is just being dumb - the real result of this is the media exposure the suit is getting, not any reward that will come of it.