I laughed because it's true. MMO players are all racists.The defending lawyer described her client as 'isolated and living in a fantasy world, spending hours on his computer in his room where his persona could be as he made it, good or bad.
That guy was a retard, but seriously, 3 years in prison for something like that?
http://www.bluegartr.com/forum/viewt...=12760&start=0Originally Posted by Quicklet
That's pretty interesting. The validity of using statements made online (through e-mail, forums/BBS', etc) as concrete evidence in legal proceedings has been a really murky subject. Not only does this case set precedent in what constitutes 'speech', it will also have bearing on the nature of libel and/or slander suits which are dervied from what has been written/said in the course of digital communications.
Three years in jail sounds a little excessive - though I'm sure it's only a minimum security institution. However, given the circumstances I feel as though the courts ruled justly; this person's actions, aside from being racist, are in just the worst kind of disrespectful and hateful nature. Hopefully the precedent set here will go to show that what you 'say' online is always read by other human beings, not just a computer. The digital world can no longer be used as a shield for hateful or unlawful behavior.
England doesn't have freedom of speech?
Welcome to "Cyberspace Laws..." which most people like to pretend do not exist.
Some things that people should realize are enforced by law:
the Brandenburg test -- In cyberspace law, this means that no matter how repugnant the web page, there can be no claim for invasion of privacy or harm unless the speaker intends incitement, openly encourages or urges incitement, imminent action, or suggests a duty to do harm.
the O'Brien test -- In cyberspace law, this means that any offensive or invasive graphic images, design features, or symbols cannot be suppressed merely for the sake of suppression. There must be other reasons such as traffic congestion, trespass, disorderly conduct, or breach of peace.
the Miller test -- In cyberspace law, this means that anything deemed obscene or invasive must appeal to prurient interests (morbid, abnormal, or disgusting), involve hard core demeaning acts to women, and lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
Libel -- In cyberspace law, this means that privacy is invaded when the intent of the web page author is malicious or reckless, providing that damage can be shown to reputation, profession, or business. Public figures are exempt, as is parody, cartoon, or anything clearly for entertainment purposes.
Fighting words -- In cyberspace law, this means that privacy is invaded by anything abusive and insulting, which under face-to-face circumstances would provoke an immediate violent response. Public officials are held to higher standard, however.
Pornography -- In cyberspace law, this means that privacy is invaded when the web content provider fails to restrict easy access to their site or fails to construct fencing that at least requires users to attest to age. Certain displays are prohibited but unenforced in some local jurisdictions, such as sadomasochism, bestiality, snuff flicks, and degradation to women. Solicitation of prostitution is, of course, expressly prohibited unless parties are in a private chat room.
Hate sites -- In cyberspace law, race- or hate-motivated web sites do not invade privacy if the speaker honestly believes they are contributing to the free interchange of ideas and the ascertainment of truth. The best that can be done is to track and counter such sites.
no, why do you think those impudent american colonies revolted? :DOriginally Posted by BRP
trolling on BG boards is now punishable by banning and 3 years in a pound you in the ass prison, not one of the conjugal visits one
Originally Posted by Dead Kid's Mother
Someone needs to come back to reality. The guy is an internet troll, not the Antichrist.
yeah, wtf, I was just gonna ask that. That's pretty retarded you get 3 yrs oin prison for speaking your mind.England doesn't have freedom of speech?
Click through to the article on The Guardian website (national newspaper here), part of the sentence was for child porn.
So... more prison time for posting racist messages than child porn. That's pretty fucking lame lol.He was sentenced at Liverpool crown court to two years and eight months' in jail for the race hate crime and six months consecutively for the child pornography offences.
The law is an ass.
It was like 2.8 years for the racist stuff, but seriously, that's retarded as hell, lol.