Slashdot Mirror
Twitter Sued For $50M For Refusing To Identify Anti-Semitic Users
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."
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.
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
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
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.
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...
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?
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
Google could just purchase Italy outright. I hear it will be rather a bargain. Problem solved!
At that point, it almost sounds like kidnapping for ransom...
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.
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)