New UK law could expose message boards to fines

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Truth be told, the report is quite limited, but it doesn't sound like this law changes very much in the UK.

Under English law (technically no such thing as "UK law") the courts have had power
since 1974 to order one person (person A) to disclose the identity of another person (person B) when person B is guilty of a tort and the claimant needs to know who they are in order to sue them - even where person A is innocent and has done nothing wrong. That was developed by the courts rather than by the legislature.

The other thing worth bearing in mind is that in England libel and slander laws are heavily slanted in favour of claimants. The claimant only has to prove that the defamatory comment was made: it is then for the defendant to prove to the satisfaction of the court that it was actually true. Otherwise they are liable. Accordingly, everyone in the UK from journalists to online posters tend to be quite cautious about making rash and unsubstantiated statements.


---------- Post Merged at 02:27 PM ---------- Previous Post was at 02:25 PM ----------

As an addendum to this, there was a recent case in England over the summer whereby a gay porn producer used this legal device to force internet companies to disclose the names of people who had illegally downloaded his films without paying any royalties. The court ordered the internet companies to turn over the data, even though the claim was thinly disguised blackmail, the producer had good violation of copyright claims against those persons and the court held he was entitled to pursue them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My ex climbed a tree across the lake to watch me through the window, I lived on the 3rd floor :rofl3:
 
Which brings us back to the UK law. I fully support using real names in just about every circumstance. Of course I'm a US citizen living in the US and under our laws anonymity is something to be doled out with great care. In general people have a right to face their acccusers, etc. It also helps in civilized discourse. There have been notable exceptions to that over the centuries. Those exceptions are worthy of considerable study as to their cause and consequences. The internet and its' developing customs have raised the issue much more broadly which is illustrated by the UK issue.

Me? I use a screen name here. But, as I said, I'm also on other boards where real names are used. I conform to the custom of the board on which I post. I refrain from posting specifics like current location, etc. But, the reality is that none of us is truely anonymous to the determined information gatherer.




 
Last edited by a moderator:


A ScubaBoard Staff Message...

Off-topic posts have been deleted
 
My Gosh! What a load of horse manure! Now online forums are subjected to
[**FOLLOWING COMMENT IS CENSORED UNDER THE UK CYBER SECURITY ACT 2011**]
 
Last edited:
KD8NPB....

73 de KC7DVF. If you're ever in AZ, look me up.... we'll go diving at Lake Pleasant.

Adam, KC7DVF
 
This is quite a serious issue in the UK. I don't know how widely reported this is across the pond but we are going through a massive paedophile witch hunt at the moment. This all started following the death of Jimmy Savile. For the benefit of non-UK posters (who form the majority) he was a very famous, rather eccentric, broadcaster with a career spanning decades. After his death, people came forward saying he abused them in care homes and hospitals. He had worked in these institutions as a volunteer and received a knighthood for his charitable works.

Since this, there has been a massive media feeding frenzy and a lot of famous names (some living, some dead) have been banded about on the internet as potential paedophiles. Some relate to the Jimmy Savile scandal and some are unrelated. Some of them may be guilty but I would put money on most being malicious lies.

Certain cultures are very proud of their rights to freedom of speech, the USA being a prime example, and I believe it is a good thing too. Despite this, there has to be certain laws to protect the innocent, and where justified, national security. Another right that can be eroded by too much free speech is somebody's right to a fair trial. If somebody is outed and the Crown Prosecution Service decide there is sufficient evidence for a trial, how do you find a jury that has not been exposed to conjecture, hearsay and downright lies?

If somebody has something to say, I'm all for allowing them to say it, but it is wrong that somebody can tell malicious lies and hide behind social media sites. Publishers have a legal (and I believe moral) obligation to ensure they do not publish defamatory material. Why should it matter whether the author is a staff writer, a freelance journalist or some nut-case on Twitter?
 
Personally, I think ALL POSTERS should be using their REAL names...posting under fake names is a sickness in itself, created by the Internet.....

While I agree, I don't think it would change anything. Look at FaceBook. The postings and filth people spew from their mouths on comments is horrific. It is people's disconnect from reality that has been caused by social media. People interact differently online, even when using their real name. They distance themselves from the person to whom they are speaking.
 

Back
Top Bottom