(http://i45.servimg.com/u/f45/13/55/53/83/affrai10.gif)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18404621
Websites to be forced to identify trolls under new measures
Sites such as Facebook have been used to abuse people under the mask of anonymity
Websites will soon to be forced to identify people who have posted defamatory messages online.
New government proposals say victims have a right to know who is behind malicious messages without the need for costly legal battles.
The powers will be balanced by measures to prevent false claims in order to get material removed.
Last week, a British woman won a court order forcing Facebook to identify users who had harassed her.
Nicola Brookes had been falsely branded a paedophile and drug dealer by users - known as trolls - on Facebook.
Facebook, which did not contest the order, will now reveal the IP addresses of people who had abused her so she can prosecute them.
The new powers, to be added to the Defamation Bill, will make this process far less time-consuming and costly, the government said.
Complying with requests would afford the website greater protection from being sued in the event of a defamation claim.
End to 'scurrilous rumour'
Currently, in legal terms, every website "hit" - visit - on a defamatory article can be counted as a separate offence.
This means many websites remove articles as soon as a defamation claim is made - either rightly or wrongly.
"Website operators are in principle liable as publishers for everything that appears on their sites, even though the content is often determined by users," said Justice Secretary Ken Clarke.
"But most operators are not in a position to know whether the material posted is defamatory or not and very often - faced with a complaint - they will immediately remove material.
Nicola Brookes said the abuse started after she posted a message about an X Factor star "Our proposed approach will mean that website operators have a defence against libel as long as they identify the authors of allegedly defamatory material when requested to do so by a complainant."
Mr Clarke said the measures would mean an end to "scurrilous rumour and allegation" being posted online without fear of adequate punishment.
"The government wants a libel regime for the internet that makes it possible for people to protect their reputations effectively but also ensures that information online can't be easily censored by casual threats of litigation against website operators.
"It will be very important to ensure that these measures do not inadvertently expose genuine whistleblowers, and we are committed to getting the detail right to minimise this risk."
Have you been affected by any of the issues raised in this story? Send us your comments and experiences using the form below.
(http://i45.servimg.com/u/f45/13/55/53/83/36111610.gif)
How does this work if the troll decides to grab wifi from sources other than home?
If they also have an email account that cannot be tied to a home, I doubt there are any ways to link an IP address to a sole human being.
I do believe they have their ways. And those ways are most likely a lot deeper than we all think. They most likey know the serial numbers on my CPU every time I am line or even just connected. No different that I know where you are on your phone to a meter. A first offence would be hard but a combination would pin point them. Some of these people are just out to get their jollys at someones expence. We are not talking about forum battles. It is the hate crimes they need to stop. I for one like freedom of speach but they go to far with what they do. We all know it, we all see it. Thank goodness, not here. But it will hit sooner or later. What Zorgon does will determine how the site shapes up. 100 posts per day vs 10,000 is a different challenge.
If here and a troll grabs WiFi that has been tagged, the wifi site would instantly go off line by a back door signal and have to reboot. The owner would know something is wrong and check it out. A new face in the area. They could shut him down or stay off line. Don't ask me how they do it but if I even write one wrong word, I am off instantly.
Deuem
I see this from two sides.
First it would be great to get rid of trolls and schills that simply want to be sht disturbers.
However isn't this the type of surveilance that was written about in the book 1984?
How long before they are knocking on doors looking for people that say anything that goes against the "security of the Home Land"?
How long before neighbours are reporting neighbours?
I am not on Facebook and don't plan on being. We all know the reason it was created and who is behind it.
Would it not be as easy as this. What you would get put in jail for in the real world so be it the net world. Same laws apply?
And yes it is too easy to take the next step and the next and so on once it starts. Some people are so bad on the net but so nice in public. Should they be allowed to hide behind a screen and destroy other people. Like they did this lady in the story. Like Yahoo, they have so many posts, they just gave up with the mods. There was a time you would lose your account for 1 swear word. Now anything goes. Is that right? At least give it a rating like the movies. I won't let my kid read Yahoo comments anymore nor YouTube.
How do you stop the ones that go way, way over the edge with out censorship?
By all means, 2 sides, I agree....
Deuem
I think the internet could be compared to minefield. Or at the very least, a house full of kids, cats, or both. I have no personal experience with minefields, Goddess be thanked, but kids and cats are another story. ALWAYS WATCH YOUR STEP. I know of one person who has threteaned to sue me over something I said about his behavior. Not him, just his behavior. This person then referred to me as pre-pubescent, and when I called him on that he said it was meant as a compliment, because I can be as brutally honest as a child. Feller must think I just fell offen the turnip truck. I agree, that better behavioral controls need to exist in online chatting and posting, but the cotrols ought to be intrinsic to each of us. Okay, that's my two mice worth.
Shasta
because Ican
"feller" is an interesting choice of words!
check this out:
nephilim: 5303 nphiyl nef-eel' or nphil {nef-eel'}; from 5307; properly, a feller, i.e. a bully or tyrant:--giant.
always wondered how that ended up in our language as a reference to a male of the species.
It is unfortunate that the article chose the label "trolls' because what a troll is and the intent of this action are two different things
What they are clearly address her has nothing to do with free speech or censorship. It has to do with outright slander and defamation of character.
I would be like me posting on twitter and face book that any one of you is a child molester and name you by name. I would not need proof, just say it often enough and loud enough and it will soon go viral
A good example is the crap Ed Fouche spouts about Bob Lazar and John over at Alien Minds (not sure why they don't take legal action but that is their call) It is NOT free speech when it encroaches on the rights of others, a point most people forget under the anonymity of their web nickname.
Freedom of Speech (in America)
Article 19 of the ICCPR states that "[e]veryone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice". Article 19 goes on to say that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals".
And this is in the USA most other countries have even stricter rights :P
Everyone please ignore the weird out of place line at the end of my post. My android has its less than cooperative moments to augment my typing non-skills. "Feller" was a colloquialism I acquired while living in NE Oklahoma. It stuck with me much like "ova yonder" and y'all. I suppose I could have referred to a bipedal hominid of the male gender. Feller was shorter.
Shasta
Quote from: shadow-watcher on June 13, 2012, 03:24:48 AM
How does this work if the troll decides to grab wifi from sources other than home?
If they also have an email account that cannot be tied to a home, I doubt there are any ways to link an IP address to a sole human being.
Well there are many ways actually. Over at ATS when you get banned you can always create a new account with a proxy server... but they can block proxy servers from being allowed to post ;) Ans this is a simple script
Sure it may be a big job to trace your IP through multiple servers, but then "They" have super computers.
They can also make a law that says your IP server has to 'give you up' Oh wait they already passed that law :P
This isn't about the trolls that are just little kids messing with peoples heads Those we can just erase :D
This is about deliberate stalking and attacks against ones character.
And yes they simply need to apply existing laws to the internet. Only problem is that while laws are usually for local jurisdiction, ie county state or federal, the internet is international. So they would need something that can cross jurisdictional boundaries in order for this to have a chance of working
(http://www.danasoft.com/vipersig.jpg)
I'm an old troll and I remember back when trolling meant contributing something unique to the community in an unorthodox way which inspired humour and thought.
Quote from: micjer on June 13, 2012, 01:06:41 PM
I see this from two sides.
First it would be great to get rid of trolls and schills that simply want to be sht disturbers.
However isn't this the type of surveilance that was written about in the book 1984?
How long before they are knocking on doors looking for people that say anything that goes against the "security of the Home Land"?
How long before neighbours are reporting neighbours?
I am not on Facebook and don't plan on being. We all know the reason it was created and who is behind it.
Exactly. What did Bennie Franklin say about liberty and safety?
As for the Hotel Califacebook (You can check out any time You like but You can never leave)... I won't be checking in either.
I will have to watch 1984 again just to recall how it compares now...
I suspect that the way things are going...we will all be under permanent surveillance 24 hrs a day if we do not find a solution to how to avoid it.
Most of the battle will be convincing the masses who are not even awake yet as to whats happening.
Don't forget that the social security number arrived in much the same way: "Oh, it solves a very important problem and it will NEVER be used to identify You!"
Uh huh. And We see how THAT turned out!
Quote from: Amaterasu on June 16, 2012, 04:41:30 AM
Exactly. What did Bennie Franklin say about liberty and safety?
yeah smart dude... but he was an Illuminati working for a New World order ;)
Quote from: zorgon on June 17, 2012, 09:10:08 AM
yeah smart dude... but he was an Illuminati working for a New World order ;)
Well... there are new days and new days.