[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-gne]External Servers and Illegal/Extreme Content
From: |
Imran Ghory |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-gne]External Servers and Illegal/Extreme Content |
Date: |
Sun, 18 Feb 2001 14:56:26 -0000 |
On 18 Feb 2001, at 4:47, Bob Dodd wrote:
>All it reqiures to end up in court, is that the person you
> write about says "prove it". The defendants are both the original
> author AND ANY PUBLISHER OF THE LIBEL.
GNE could just not carry any potential libelous information (unless
it gives a specific source), if GNE is just mirroring this data then it
could plead the common carrier defence.
> The UK also has laws covering data protection, so that if we hold
> personal details on an individual, we must be registered with the UK
> government, and have a clear system by which we people can check their
> details for inaccuracies, and to insist upon corrections.
The DPA is mostly an implementation of the European Data protection
legislation.
And anyhow I believe the GNE would count as an exception to the DPA under
part IV for the '98 act, for details see,
http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/80029--e.htm#32
> Next there are the obscenity laws, which are draconian in theor, but a
> little more relaxed in practice. It does mean that you have to be very
> careful with any material of a sexual nature, and anything involving
> "moving images" needs a rating code from the censors (yes, we have
> censors).
That's why it would be better to have the servers containing such material to
be
legally independant of the FSF.
> Then there's our blasphemy laws. They're rather quaint and
> old-fashioned and protect only christianity, but they are technically
> quite draconian. Saying that the prophet Mohammed was a womanising
> drunk is legal: saying jesus christ was a womanising drunk would get
> you a small room with bars. Not that these laws get used much, but they
> are there if some politician decides to kick up a fuss.
I think they were repealed by the annual act of government which periodically
disposes of antiquated laws.
> Anyone used to US-style first ammendment laws is probably amazed by the
> number of restrictions we place on free speech (there are probably
> more, those were just the ones off the top of my head)
But at least we don't make it illegal for someone to distribute DeCSS source
code :-)
Maybe we should require authors to say that they will take full legal
responsibility for the data.
Imran
- Re: [Bug-gne]Ideologies vs. Practicality in GNE, (continued)
- Re: [Bug-gne]Ideologies vs. Practicality in GNE, Mike Warren, 2001/02/20
- Re: [Bug-gne]External Servers and Illegal/Extreme Content, Tom Chance, 2001/02/17
- Re: [Bug-gne]External Servers and Illegal/Extreme Content, Hook, 2001/02/17
- Re: [Bug-gne]External Servers and Illegal/Extreme Content, Tom Chance, 2001/02/18
- Re: [Bug-gne]External Servers and Illegal/Extreme Content, Imran Ghory, 2001/02/18
- Re: [Bug-gne]External Servers and Illegal/Extreme Content, Hook, 2001/02/18
- Re: [Bug-gne]External Servers and Illegal/Extreme Content, Tom Chance, 2001/02/18
- Re: [Bug-gne]External Servers and Illegal/Extreme Content, Imran Ghory, 2001/02/18
- Re: [Bug-gne]External Servers and Illegal/Extreme Content, Mike Warren, 2001/02/20
- Re: [Bug-gne]External Servers and Illegal/Extreme Content, Bob Dodd, 2001/02/18
- Re: [Bug-gne]External Servers and Illegal/Extreme Content,
Imran Ghory <=
- [Bug-gne]A revisit to the Wacky Ideas Dept., Tom Chance, 2001/02/18
- Re: [Bug-gne]A revisit to the Wacky Ideas Dept., Bob Dodd, 2001/02/18
- Re: [Bug-gne]A revisit to the Wacky Ideas Dept., Tom Chance, 2001/02/18
- [Bug-gne]Moderators/ Censors/ Editors, Tom Chance, 2001/02/18
Re: [Bug-gne]the problem of illegal content vs. freedom, Christopher Mahan, 2001/02/18