UK government proposes fine or block if website fails to tackle “online harms”
1–10 of 91 posts
Re: UK government proposes fine or block if website fails to tackle “online harms”
#2> But it also covers harmful behaviour that has a less clear legal definition such as cyber-bullying, trolling and the spread of fake news and disinformation.
So, basically any site with user content can be fined/blocked at any time at the official's discretion.
Re: UK government proposes fine or block if website fails to tackle “online harms”
#3The issue here will be securing a conviction or affecting actual change. I suspect the cost to conviction/prosecution (for the Uk taxpayer) will be so high, and the fines/action so small for the respective platforms, it will hardly be worth the effort.
Most likely companies will be fined retrospectively for a bit of government PR.
Re: UK government proposes fine or block if website fails to tackle “online harms”
#4OK lets say this article harmed me in some way. If I don't need to prove it then this law lets me shut down the BBC? How do you deal with thousands of "online harms"? If I do need to prove it, given the law is so vague on what that is, I can never succeed since big sites have fancy lawyers, and small sites will just go out of business, and the law is a waste of time.
Re: UK government proposes fine or block if website fails to tackle “online harms”
#5OK lets say this article harmed me in some way. If I don't need to prove it then this law lets me shut down the BBC? How do you deal with thousands of "online harms"? If I do need to prove it, given the law is so vague on what that is, I can never succeed since big sites have fancy lawyers, and small sites will just go out of business, and the law is a waste of time.
Lol this law is not to apply to THEM!
Re: UK government proposes fine or block if website fails to tackle “online harms”
#6I hate to say it, but large online social platforms are really giving governments way too much ammunition to start regulating and censoring the now largely centralized Internet.
Very, very scary but interesting times ahead.
Re: UK government proposes fine or block if website fails to tackle “online harms”
#7> But it also covers harmful behaviour that has a less clear legal definition such as cyber-bullying, trolling and the spread of fake news and disinformation. So, basically any site with user content can be fined/blocked at any time at the official's discretion.
This is probably a tool the government wants to use when something like a mass shooting manifesto is published. Facebook can't stop people reading it? Well then let's block Facebook for a week.
Interestingly, this is the same tactic dictatorships use to quell rebellions.
Re: UK government proposes fine or block if website fails to tackle “online harms”
#8OK lets say this article harmed me in some way. If I don't need to prove it then this law lets me shut down the BBC? How do you deal with thousands of "online harms"? If I do need to prove it, given the law is so vague on what that is, I can never succeed since big sites have fancy lawyers, and small sites will just go out of business, and the law is a waste of time.
The law is not a waste of time. The law is clearly intended to prevent disruption in the online news / publishing space to protect the big players from competition. In that sense, this law seems like it will be extremely effective.
Re: UK government proposes fine or block if website fails to tackle “online harms”
#9Since David Cameron days, the UK government has had every intention of turning UK into another China, at least as far as surveillance and censorship goes. They just can't do it so obviously, so they do it in a round-about way like arguing for "porn filters" and later for other "serious crimes". And then you wake up one day that they use the filters for whatever they want.
Re: UK government proposes fine or block if website fails to tackle “online harms”
#10> But it also covers harmful behaviour that has a less clear legal definition such as cyber-bullying, trolling and the spread of fake news and disinformation. So, basically any site with user content can be fined/blocked at any time at the official's discretion.
This child-porn and terrorism is the propaganda catch-phrase to make people agree with it. Like the UK porn-filter.
While it never will happen, this rule would mean that the BBC should be banned too. It published fake news that started the Iraq war, and one of the famous hosts was a child molester.
Instead they will ban sites that disclose the military propaganda that is published by the government media. Will they now try to block wikileaks and other similar journalism?
My greatest fear is that these waves of censorship are there to remove resistance against a 3rd world war. The US, Israel and UK are currently very aggressive.
Just as an example: Propaganda on Iraq and Venezuela https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7eW4ASIo3I