Internet 'trolls' will now face prosecution.

[Deleted]

I think people need to realise that this only affects and applies to those that are essentially committing hate crimes and serious abuse online that leads to real situations.

A few months back the BBC found an "Internet Troll" who had harassed and abused the family of a dead pakistani national, and set up a fake memorial page on Facebook and then abused it and sent hate to his family. I'm all for people like this being found and prosecuted, but it won't be impacting people who just make jokes about "Your Mum" / "Your Dad".

But what if you post a joke in Twitter that is taken out of context? Paul Chambers could argue that what he said was purely innocent, a harmless joke - and yet was taken to court over it.

[Deleted]

Is it just me who feel that harassment and trolling is two widely different things?
And in the case of the article in OP, it's actually neither, but instead a case of Defamation (which is also the name of the bill).

Why do journalists write things that are completely clueless about? If you don't know what you are talking about, call someone and ask before writing it!

Also, note that defamation and harassment is already illegal, no matter if it's online and offline. This just means that it will be easier to prosecute, at the same time as it actually ADDS protection for the websites.

Good addition to the law all around.

[Sivick]

trolling is more like being a dick on the internet. what the lady describes is more like malicious harassment, which is above and beyond trolling

[Deleted]

But what if you post a joke in Twitter that is taken out of context? Paul Chambers could argue that what he said was purely innocent, a harmless joke - and yet was taken to court over it.

Just the same as you can in real life, if you publish something somewhere else. Then it's up the court to decide whether you are guilty or not.

[Nobleshield]

It's amusing how, as children, we learned the rhyme "Sticks and stones can break my bones but names can never hurt me" and yet today as adults we whine and cry when somebody says something offensive to us and demand "Justice". People need to grow the fuck up and realize that life isn't kindergarten, if you can't deal with what people say then you ignore them, you don't pursue legal action like a spoiled baby.

[Jtbrig7390]

Prove that it was you at the computer at the time of post?

The burden of proof is impossible. Anyone could be using your computer.

it will work like anything eles *like if you let a friend in ur car he has drugs on him and you didn't know...well 5mins later your pulled over cop finds the drugs both of you get into truble for it* cause the way they see it*at lease here in the USA* is its your fault for not knowing what is in your car.
the Computer/isp is yours so you should know what its being used for.

[Mekh]

It's amusing how, as children, we learned the rhyme "Sticks and stones can break my bones but names can never hurt me" and yet today as adults we whine and cry when somebody says something offensive to us and demand "Justice". People need to grow the fuck up and realize that life isn't kindergarten, if you can't deal with what people say then you ignore them, you don't pursue legal action like a spoiled baby.

You people keep saying that as if having a "thicker skin" helps against defamation.

[TJ]

I hate this whole label of 'internet trolls' the media is pushing. A troll is someone who tricks others into doing/believing something for a laugh at their gullibility. This new troll definition pushed by the media is nothing to do with that, they're labeling people who are just pricks and bullies a term seen to relate to the internet as a way of looking current in trends.

Couldn't agree more. In my book there's a difference between a general troll who posts something misleading and someone who is mocking someone about a dead family member etc, trolls are trolls, the other is borderline psychotic.

[Deleted]

You don't need to proof that the person was on the PC. You are liable for your internet connection, at least in most European Countries. If you have a open Wlan and someone uses it to do something illegal it is your fault because you provided it.

Another thing that everyone is saying "as long as im not to much of a bully". Again in most European Countries there is no limitless right of speech (to be fair the usa doesn't have that either because of the "house right" any forum/private owned place you visit has the right to censor or ban you if they feel like it) and insulting someone or defamatory is an felony.

[TJ]

It's amusing how, as children, we learned the rhyme "Sticks and stones can break my bones but names can never hurt me" and yet today as adults we whine and cry when somebody says something offensive to us and demand "Justice". People need to grow the fuck up and realize that life isn't kindergarten, if you can't deal with what people say then you ignore them, you don't pursue legal action like a spoiled baby.

I agree to a certain extent, but when it comes to frequent harassment over and over, you can't say you wouldn't want them punished if it happened to you.

[Palmatum]

Maby just maby she should have closed her facebook account or GOSH not had one in the first place. Its not hard to not give a fuck what idiots say about you on the internet.

She shouldn't have to though, that's the point. If there were people being randomly murdered on the route you normally take home from work, you shouldn't have to ignore it, do nothing about it and just find another way home. Problems should be dealt with, not swept under the carpet.

[Kouki]

What if someone is hacked? or the defamation is a joke and someone outside the joke reports it?

[Itisamuh]

haha, it'll never happen, not so long as 4chan remains in operation. Haven't people learned by now that directly antagonizing 4chan/Anonymous inevitably results in the antagonist being embarrassed in front of the entire planet?

Few things would please me more than to see that website, and all the people who behave that way, disappear.

[Mekh]

What if someone is hacked?

Then he is still responsible for his stuff.

or the defamation is a joke and someone outside the joke reports it?

Then the "offender" and the "victim" can surely explain that to the prosecution if it actually goes that far. Can somebody who is not hurt by it even sue for defamation on behalf of someone else?

[Kouki]

Perhaps not 100% relevant, but still, it's in the ball park.

Wth are cops doing on the facebook in the firstplace? dont the fbi own it?

[Deleted]

Then he is still responsible for his stuff.

That shouldn't be the case, if someone stole my car and proceeded to run someone over with it, I wouldn't be held liable.

[Butler to Baby Sloths]

What if someone is hacked? or the defamation is a joke and someone outside the joke reports it?

You are responsible for the security of your internet connection and computer. Anything that happens as a result of your negligence is on you.

They could just post the "joke" as "direct friends only". Then nobody outside the "in crowd" even gets to know about it.

[Mekh]

That shouldn't be the case, if someone stole my car and proceeded to run someone over with it, I wouldn't be held liable.

Depends on if you locked it up properly. The laws about responsibility for your network expect you to exercise common-sense security like having a password in place. If you are running an open connection you can be held liable for e.g. illegal downloads.

[prankstar]

wont work due to these little things known as a proxy

[Kakera]

In all seriousness if you can't ignore negativity from people and not let shit people say get to you then you don't deserve any sympathy from anybody. Sure, people are mean and jerks and shouldn't care enough to say the things that they say. It's sad that people have to go to such lengths to get kicks at others expense. But at the same time it's almost equally as sad that people let these trolls effect them to begin with. This law is stupid.