Latest ridiculously broad laws threaten free speech

Matthew Toseland <toad-EI5O+8PHWbJeeLb3ft/[email protected]> Fri, 3 Apr 2009 17:16:37 +0100
Newsgroups gmane.network.freenet.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
--===============1858118644==
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
  boundary="nextPart2260276.NJNdXHs0cu";
  protocol="application/pgp-signature";
  micalg=pgp-sha1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

--nextPart2260276.NJNdXHs0cu
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

(Source: Guardian technology supplement, 2 April 2009, rewritten)

Some incredibly broad laws passed last year are being used, apparently for =
the=20
first time, to attack online anonymity. An unnamed IT worker who owned the=
=20
colo for the Indymedia UK server has been charged under these laws. His=20
offence appears to be that the server, which he doesn't administer, does no=
t=20
keep IP addresses of posters. After some animal rights activists were=20
imprisoned, an anonymous poster posted Justice Neil Butterfield's home=20
address and incited harassment against him. This was quickly deleted by the=
=20
admins, and it was posted again and again deleted. Kent police demanded the=
=20
IP addresses, eventually seized the servers (fortunately they are one of ma=
ny=20
mirrors), and arrested, charged and bailed him under Serious Crimes Act=20
provisions prohibiting:

"intentionally encouraging or assisting an offence"
"encouraging or assisting an offence believing it will be committed"
"encouraging or assisting offences believing one or more will be committed"

Apparently one possible defence is that he acted reasonably, but "that woul=
d=20
be for him to prove", according to a senior partner from Simons Muirhead &=
=20
Burton. The case now rests with the Crown Prosecution Service.


My (toad's) remarks:
If he is convicted merely for not keeping logs of IP addresses of posters,=
=20
what chance do we have? If interpreted that broadly it would surely make al=
l=20
anonymous web services illegal in the UK? Criminal law is supposed to be=20
unambiguous and narrowly defined, this is why harsh penalties are available=
;=20
not introduce numerous new offences (such as not logging IP addresses on a=
=20
forum discussing animal rights activism) by the back door!

--nextPart2260276.NJNdXHs0cu
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc 
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iQIcBAABCAAGBQJJ1jZlAAoJEHsvjZi+xPTD8dgP/RmH8DEgbCGYbASeIWrIXQ4e
mm4qRTDRqcU1CaqMA60WuT5HT8C1M3fS7BxdmEBEbeVQqJ2Dl9jWx1WXXoyUwgcv
EKBEGiIar5G4cE+krjbvEd+NyV3WMXnAdRswU/tt9SO8rHTYgBQSaHKm/Hvl2Qwi
Qoi8YDnsgukrrGB28PBdDoEnph0AoMtZIcvKfjw+qRmh7deZL86mWK8ffcIz2kQa
zHofGv4DB2Cc2BnY4LItVxB1yD0nTuTfZg6+YdW67bT4o71CCPGhcpbd0er92NK/
nEYoMRksYFr+g5nF2uFFFFesLRZ0ch8ZlIMs9V8/I4mw4TMzNllZ8K6EIBuS6gVE
K15am/dy//YRVc/xWbD4h2ePggCwUZDDLXgInl6z6Br4X+ipRMrPFDa8/of0qtXb
9LO7Yls298Sz1V8I92eWfH4i5fefSksNYVsuZWfmAmltgImeFVH3X4zbbwybaKGS
EWRLdSRsHgGMJm4gzuL1ai3HU+MmRSild7rbYn61MwaJvjB0KU5TeWoBvJ6x0wKy
wPxvntvOvHOVvtSUpRlBDrxO/JfcWIdOjxb9/blcSklKjqLZxZcWfs/TCNtpQaQr
hKLaGgojh6Azv+35/au0oz07v7OsHzziZzo4QE0NuYx1R1ixrljaHkj7OA6BwSQc
GLnnOSaYU5q9Tve/KW8M
=TpOq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart2260276.NJNdXHs0cu--

--===============1858118644==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
chat mailing list
[email protected]
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
--===============1858118644==--