Bloggers have no right to privacy says British court

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Archangel, Jun 18, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. YesItsMe

    YesItsMe LE Good Egg (charities)

    There is no such thing as privacy on the internet.
    If you don't want others to know what you write and think, keep it to yourself or keep a diary.

    If you got a bit of IT knowledge and some time on your hand, there will be no secret at all.

    Wake up, using computer and internet isn't doing magic, it's simple technology.
  2. The problem the Law and the Government have with the internet, is that, as Iran and China are finiding out, it is almost impossible to police properly.

    Although you can trace a user, this judgement will only breed a rash of software that will make identifying the user more difficult, (can be done now if your that bothered).
  3. I agree .... to some extent. Many might argue that in Britain today there is no privacy... period!

    But this isn't a case of hacking usernames or wearing a tin foil hat. In this case a High Court Judge (who has a history of... er, controversial decisions) has made a legal ruling that if bloggers say something that disturbs the status quo or p1sses off some people who might not agree with what is being said (surely the essence of blogging) that person has no right to remain annonymous and must be publicly named 8O

    You may not agree but I think that's wrong and it certainly affects what goes on on this website
  4. YesItsMe

    YesItsMe LE Good Egg (charities)

    My bold.

    The biggest problem is the severe lack of funds, officers and most of all regulations by law.
    It's the legislative power to be in great demand first.
  5. Wasnt it the newspapers who dobbed him in though?
  6. Yup! NightJack was grassed up by the Times newspaper. The cardinal rule of newspapers is (should be) protect your sources ... but they were the ones who screwed him!
  7. YesItsMe

    YesItsMe LE Good Egg (charities)

    Sorry if I might use wrong terms, still I will try to answer, cause this is what I deal with every day.

    Would you agree that in case of defamation or even malicious falsehood the affected person should have the right to react against the offender ?
    This can only be done if you know who you are reacting to.

    And before the first one starts complaining about freedom of expression, which is indeed a fundamental right,
    but still you have to make sure that you're not insulting, offending aso anybody else.
    The moment criminal law is involved, anonymity on the internet will and has to be abolished.
  8. Not going to happen. The powers that be can chuck as much money and man hours they like, but somebody on the net will find a way to block, hide etc.
    If say the UK, set up a division of say 1000 to police the internet, they are taking on probably millions of software programmers who could run rings round them and will do it for fun!
  9. YesItsMe

    YesItsMe LE Good Egg (charities)

    That's why I mentioned legislative power. We need laws (no woolly regulations like we have atm to about 80%) and a scale of proper and adequate penalties.
    Ok, I have to admit that I'm not sure about differences to the UK. This is about German law. Still I guess there isn't a lot of a difference.
    Trust me, there is no permanent hiding, and there will never be.
  10. No privacy laws then? ... none of that wishy-washy Guardian-reading hippy liberal thinking! If you've done nothing wrong you've got nothing to hide, eh? If you say anything everyone should know exactly who you are... is that right "YesItsMe"?

    Night Jack was plod as well and he was evidently of the view that we shouldn't cheerfully surrender to an Orwellian 1984
  11. There is no right to privacy in England & Wales. Several high profile people have found that out to their cost. Even when taken to Europe, some have seen their claim under Art 8 ECHR being countered by the opposition's claim to freedom of expression under Art 10 ECHR. For those who create blogs, they cannot realistically expect immunity, given that they are quite prepared to fire sh8t at people from behind anonymous internet identities and would be quite prepared to hide behind Art 10 ECHR, when caught out. He put the blog up for the enjoyment of the public, at the expense of others, so he has no protection nor should he be afforded any.

    F*ck him.

    Arthur Askey
    Chief Constable
  12. YesItsMe

    YesItsMe LE Good Egg (charities)

    Nope you got me wrong.
    What I mean is criminal law has always to be on top of privacy law.
    If you think about it for a moment, I'm sure you will understand what I mean.
    It's not about giving away names and details randomly.
    It's just and only in case people come into conflict with the law and you have to defend the rights of another person.
  13. ARRSE gets a brief mention in today's Daily Telegraph.
  14. Sorry YIM :oops: ... Yes, in truth I do see your point and I do largely agree (I'm studying Law myself!) I just got on my hobby-horse about the need to retain some degree of privacy in our society

    (I'll put the teddys back in the pram :wink: )