Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Australia Threatens Social Media Laws That Could Jail Tech Execs (cnet.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the now-we're-talking dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNET: Following the livestreamed New Zealand mosque shooting that left 50 dead in Christchurch, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison is looking to crack down on extremist content on social media. Morrison will on Tuesday meet with Australian executives of Facebook, Twitter and Google to discuss extremist content legislation that would punish these companies' executives with jail time, the Australian Financial Review reports. Local internet service providers will also be present at the meeting.

Details of the proposed legislation aren't yet known. However, Europe's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which applies to any company operating in the continent, showed that tech companies can change their global practices to appease local legislation. News of Morrison's meeting with tech executives comes on the same day that his government announced increased punishment for companies misusing user information. Maximum penalties for misuse of private data was raised from AU$2.1 million to AU$10 million -- or 10 percent of the company's domestic revenue, or three times the value gained from that misuse of data.

13 of 158 comments (clear)

  1. Size matters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Whilst GDPR shows that tech companies can change their global practices to appease local legislation - Australia is tiny compared to Europe, so I suggest the big tech companies show the Australian Government the finger, stop providing all services into Australia, and then wait for the inevitable citizen uprising which will force the Government to retract from their stupidity.

    1. Re:Size matters by thereddaikon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Read up on the East India Tea Company. Was very much an international corporation with a standing army and navy and successfully subjugated empires on its own. Their downfall only came about when they bit off more than they could chew. People look to SciFi for hypercorps like Tyrell and Wayland-Yutani that have more power than nations but they should look to the past. They existed once.

  2. Anybody remember freedom of speech? by walterbyrd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That was awesome. Too bad freedom of speech is dead now. Ah well, it had a good run.

    1. Re:Anybody remember freedom of speech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      What 'freedom of speech' are you talking about? The freedom to air your political views without being jailed by the government? You still have that. Or are you a conservative and this is more about you wanting a free pass to spread hate without consequences?

    2. Re: Anybody remember freedom of speech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The two are not mutually exclusive. Your leftist brethren, and you if your post is indicative of your rhetoric, spread hate, as you just did, by categorizing everyone on the right as a hatemonger. Think before you post hypocritical statements.

    3. Re:Anybody remember freedom of speech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      But this is already gone.
      in Imperialist America you have freedom after speech if you are not labeled as racist,sexist,antisemitic,homophobic,fascist ....by some progressive tube (CNN or Southern Poverty Law Center ...)
      then you have freedom to starve an no public life ...

      Greetings from Poland
      it is good that my Great Grand Grand ...Father did not started any colonies.

    4. Re: Anybody remember freedom of speech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      The two are not mutually exclusive. Your leftist brethren, and you if your post is indicative of your rhetoric, spread hate, as you just did, by categorizing everyone on the right as a hatemonger. Think before you post hypocritical statements.

      So, like your whiny little bitch Daffy Donald, you're saying there are good people on both sides?

      That FAKE NEWS crap collapsed on you the past few days.

      Nice to see you're too brainless to notice.

      Imagine that - a brainless "progressive". BIRM.

  3. Nobody reads the titles by MBGMorden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This doesn't make any sense to me.

    Being from the US it's tempting to make a "freedom of speech" argument, however since this is Australia I won't even go down that path. Looking at it from a purely logistical standpoint - how on Earth is a company supposed to suppress LIVESTREAMS of "extremist content". Even a human reviewer won't know what's going on until sometime specific happens.

    The best they could ever hope for would be to just have a really good user reporting system but even with that you're not going to stop the first group of people from seeing it. All this will do is enforced is basically to make tech companies simply not allow livestreaming. And heck even outside of livestreaming for something like Youtube they can't possibly human review all uploaded content to know if it's against the rules.

    To me, whether there's nefarious motive behind it or sincerely good intentions, this seems like a governmental push to get us back to the 1950's era of curated content only coming from official sources, rather than people actually sharing information among themselves.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    1. Re: Nobody reads the titles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ^^ Parent has hit the nail on the head.
      Govts HATE the loss of media control and will jump on any excuse to seize it back.

    2. Re:Nobody reads the titles by MBGMorden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety".

      I don't buy into the "maybe we don't need livestreams" argument. The free and open exchange of information and ideas is paramount to a free society. Restricting that speech is a crime far greater than any terrorist could hope to achieve.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    3. Re:Nobody reads the titles by penandpaper · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Remember, you can still setup your own server and host your own livestream

      Up until your hosting providers cuts you off. Or until you are de-indexed. Or your payment processor cuts you off. Or your bank refuses your business.

      What we have learned is that it doesn't matter if it is "your own ". Harpies will form a mob until that person/entity/idea is gone from the internet and destitute in meat space.

      At what point is it of similar burden to create your own phone network to make a phone call to your neighbor than it is to air a controversial opinion online? Why is it acceptable for "nazi's" to speak hate speech on a phone line and not the internet?

  4. Stupid politicians by pete6677 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yay, another politician looking to make a name for themselves by regulating something they have no understanding of. What could go wrong?

  5. well sure by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Infidel beheadings, of course, will continue to be broadcast unimpeded ...