GB and Russia - Not so different after all

[Mysturji]

At least, the difference is only a matter of degree, and possibly time:
Currently in Russia:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19040414

All three members of Russian punk band Pussy Riot have pleaded not guilty to charges of hooliganism over an anti-Vladimir Putin protest at Moscow's main cathedral.

The women were taken into custody in February after the protest at Moscow's Christ the Saviour Cathedral.

The case has divided Russia and inflamed the religious establishment, correspondents say.

The song outraged the Russian Orthodox Church. It accused them of blasphemy.

Supporters say the case reflects the state's growing intolerance of government opponents.

Meanwhile in Great Britain:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19059127

A teenager has been arrested by police investigating abuse of Team GB diver Tom Daley on Twitter.

After coming fourth in the men's synchronised 10m platform diving event on Monday, the 18-year-old received a message telling him he had let down his father.

Daley's father Rob died in May 2011 from brain cancer.

A 17-year-old boy was arrested at a guest house in the Weymouth area on suspicion of malicious communications.

For the record, I'm hot saying I agree with - or even condone what that twit tweeted, but it's no more a crime than singing a protest song, however badly. At least, it shouldn't be.
A similar attitude to free speech exists on certrain blogs I could mention.

[Atheist-Lite]

Same all over the world. Why we have a global revolution going on I guess?

http://gawker.com/5822610/fbi-raids-new ... estigation

[Coito ergo sum]

Yes, yes. We need the authorities to handle breaches of etiquette. That is what the world has come to, after all...

[Strontium Dog]

Isn't sending malicious communications a crime everywhere?

[mistermack]

I don't have any problem with this at all.
You can't have unlimited freedom for everybody. One person's freedom will take away another's, in the real world.
Words can do more harm than bricks.

If you attack someone verbally, maliciously, with the intention of harassing them, or instilling fear, you can harm them more than a simple slap in the face.

The law should cover it. And it does.
The law should be framed to allow as much freedom of speech as possible, while protecting someones right not to be deliberately harassed or intimidated.

In other words, a compomise. Not complete freedom of speech for all.

[Rum]

Yeah the UK is like Russia. Sure it is.

[Tero]

It's such a little island. At least the roads are paved.

[Atheist-Lite]

Our umbrellas don't kill. They are not weaponised.

[Coito ergo sum]

Isn't sending malicious communications a crime everywhere?

Not when the alleged "malicious communication" is "you disappointed your dad."

If it's repeated threats and harassment, then sure. But, being rude is not illegal in any liberal society.

[Rum]

Isn't sending malicious communications a crime everywhere?

Not when the alleged "malicious communication" is "you disappointed your dad."

If it's repeated threats and harassment, then sure. But, being rude is not illegal in any liberal society.

His dad died recently. I do however agree that it should not be a matter for the law.

Paradoxically here if you tweeted that about a politician nobody would take any notice unlike some other countries...

[Coito ergo sum]

I don't have any problem with this at all.
You can't have unlimited freedom for everybody. One person's freedom will take away another's, in the real world.
Words can do more harm than bricks.

If you attack someone verbally, maliciously, with the intention of harassing them, or instilling fear, you can harm them more than a simple slap in the face.

The law should cover it. And it does.
The law should be framed to allow as much freedom of speech as possible, while protecting someones right not to be deliberately harassed or intimidated.

In other words, a compomise. Not complete freedom of speech for all.

The guy said the other guy disappointed his dad.

Fuck, if that's illegal then lock Pappa up and throw away the key. That rape joke about Skepchicks is arguably malicious harassment that instilled fear in the Skepchicks.

This kind of shit boggles the mind. Expressions of opinion -- even negative opinions - even opinions that mistermack or someone else disappointed his dad -- with whatever intent - can not, in any liberal society, be criminalized. It's free speech as much as "God hates fags" is free speech and as much as the Chick-Fil-A President gets to express his opinion on gay marriage (which until a month ago was the same as the President's view).

Sure there isn't complete freedom of speech -- and actual threats and repeated harassment verges on conduct and is clearly distinguishable from negative opinions. But, in this case, nobody was threatened, and a nasty statement doesn't constitute harassment. And, time, place and manner restrictions - like turn the music down after 9pm, or permitting for large demonstrations, etc. are all fair game. The problem is regulating the CONTENT of a speaker's message. Just because you don't like what someone is saying doesn't make it harassment.

[Coito ergo sum]

Isn't sending malicious communications a crime everywhere?

Not when the alleged "malicious communication" is "you disappointed your dad."

If it's repeated threats and harassment, then sure. But, being rude is not illegal in any liberal society.

His dad died recently. I do however agree that it should not be a matter for the law.

It was a shitty thing to say.

Paradoxically here if you tweeted that about a politician nobody would take any notice unlike some other countries...

What are you on about? Which countries? The US laws are far less restrictive on speech tan some other countries....

[MrJonno]

Malicious communications act covers public infrastructure including the post and the internet it doesnt actually cover insulting someone face to face. In this case however its an absurd use of the law and which is why the case was dropped.

I absolutely do not believe in unlimited freedom of speech or unlimited anything. They don't exist anywhere no society could function if they did

[Rum]

Isn't sending malicious communications a crime everywhere?

Not when the alleged "malicious communication" is "you disappointed your dad."

If it's repeated threats and harassment, then sure. But, being rude is not illegal in any liberal society.

His dad died recently. I do however agree that it should not be a matter for the law.

It was a shitty thing to say.

Paradoxically here if you tweeted that about a politician nobody would take any notice unlike some other countries...

What are you on about? Which countries? The US laws are far less restrictive on speech tan some other countries....

Well Russia for example. I am tempted to add 'dumbass', but that would be wrong.

[Atheist-Lite]

There is a answer. It involves arresting the lawyers making money out of the trivial. Round them up. Put them all on a merchant ship. Sink it mid Atlantic.