It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionWebsites Are Liable For Users Comments (147 posts)(147 posts)
(147 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
This is my favourite topic
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
j0ekerr: I read the whole artilcle, and the more Iread the more enraged I felt, because it showed more and more that the EU has become a clear cut case of the right hand having no idea what the left hand is doing.

There is a separate court, which defends freedom of speech and e-commerce and has previously ruled that a site CANNOT be held accountable, nor forced to monitor its users comments.

And then this bullshit happens.

Fucking shit for brains idiots that can't even begin to be conherent among its different branches.
The ECHR is not an EU court! ECtHR != CJEU. It's part of the Council of Europe.
But generally i would agree with you post.
Post edited June 17, 2015 by ElTerprise
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
R8V9F5A2: The ruling is about hate speech; racial, homophobic and misogynistic abuse and bullying.
At least that's my interpretation of the article.
There's a big difference between the occasional sexist joke and hate speech.
So I think people are over-exaggerating the consequences of this ruling.
Unless someone starts spreading neo-nazi doctrine on this forum there's nothing to really worry about.
avatar
Shadowstalker16: Yah, no one has anything to worry about. Those are concrete terms with clear definitions which AREN'T normally twisted around to label entire groups of people.
Seriously, I hope they define the terms. Not doing so is just brainless.
If this continues, free speech WILL be curbed drastically.
Yeah, realistically its impossible to continuously police every website in Europe. So action can most likely only be taken if someone at those websites feel abused because of race, gender, religion or sexual orientation.
Communities like GOG are also self-policing, if you say something truly racist the moderators as well as other members will most likely react.
Places like Delfi, in the article, don't really have this kind of community nor do they even have moderators it seems.
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
Shadowstalker16: Yah, no one has anything to worry about. Those are concrete terms with clear definitions which AREN'T normally twisted around to label entire groups of people.
Seriously, I hope they define the terms. Not doing so is just brainless.
If this continues, free speech WILL be curbed drastically.
avatar
R8V9F5A2: Yeah, realistically its impossible to continuously police every website in Europe. So action can most likely only be taken if someone at those websites feel abused because of race, gender, religion or sexual orientation.
Communities like GOG are also self-policing, if you say something truly racist the moderators as well as other members will most likely react.
Places like Delfi, in the article, don't really have this kind of community nor do they even have moderators it seems.
Gog doesn't seem to even have moderators at times. :p
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
ElTerprise: The ECHR is not an EU court! ECtHR != CJEU. It's part of the Council of Europe.
But generally i would agree with you post.
Separate organizations with different governing bodies but ultimately, both of them continental organizations whose purpose is to rule and deliver sentences that can apply to the whole territory they have authority over.

What offends me however is that even if you say that, you really can't (and shouldn't) disassociate one from the other because when you do that, you get people stepping on each other's toes and tripping them over and generally doing more harm than good. Which seems to be what happened in this case.
Posted June 17, 2015
The problém I feel is the what is the word... precedense? It can set. Not only for comments.
It mroe feels like it is a preparation for a "law" to be able to také down sharing servers, like happened to megaupload. I wonder if google will get fined for youtube and all the materiál there, because according to that, the website is responsible.
Post edited June 17, 2015 by Noir_CZ
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
tinyE: Well, thank god Hitler was right and the Holocaust was a lie or else this place might be in trouble.
You're going to be the downfall of GOG!
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
Noir_CZ: The problém I feel is the what is the word... precedense? It can set. Not only for comments.
It mroe feels like it is a preparation for a "law" to be able to také down sharing servers, like happened to megaupload. I wonder if google will get fined for youtube and all the materiál there, because according to that, the website is responsible.
Now you are mixing other things in again, which has nothing to do with this ruling.

And by the way, if youtube or what so ever is showing copyright protected material and they don´t remove it right away (after being informed), they ARE liable already.

Same goes for drone videos and similar: There are already laws in place, something called privacy and the right too it.
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
j0ekerr: Separate organizations with different governing bodies but ultimately, both of them continental organizations whose purpose is to rule and deliver sentences that can apply to the whole territory they have authority over.

What offends me however is that even if you say that, you really can't (and shouldn't) disassociate one from the other because when you do that, you get people stepping on each other's toes and tripping them over and generally doing more harm than good. Which seems to be what happened in this case.
I just wanted to point out that they are different organisations - by no means i wanted to disassociate one from the other. That's why i could agree with your post. What me bothers here is that he have two different organisations ruling over similar cases with different outcomes. So the question what applies in Europe or specifically the European Union then? Rulings form the ECHR of the CJEU?
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
tinyE: Well, thank god Hitler was right and the Holocaust was a lie or else this place might be in trouble.
avatar
darthspudius: You're going to be the downfall of GOG!
nanking was a lie by the reds, okinawa wants more amurika bases, and we all speak weeaboo. and the real singapoor is a lie.
https://vulcanpost.com/232021/viral-website-the-real-singapore-shuts-down-on-world-press-freedom-day/
Post edited June 17, 2015 by dick1982
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
ElTerprise: I just wanted to point out that they are different organisations - by no means i wanted to disassociate one from the other. That's why i could agree with your post. What me bothers here is that he have two different organisations ruling over similar cases with different outcomes. So the question what applies in Europe or specifically the European Union then? Rulings form the ECHR of the CJEU?
I think the idea behind them is the same reason why we have a senate and a congress in most countries. Bear in mind I'm oversimplifying here since I have no idea and just a general view of what each other does. Feel free to correct me.

The theoretical explanation for those two separate bodies of government is to keep each other in check.

However in practice the senate is seen as mostly useless.
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
j0ekerr: Separate organizations with different governing bodies but ultimately, both of them continental organizations whose purpose is to rule and deliver sentences that can apply to the whole territory they have authority over.

What offends me however is that even if you say that, you really can't (and shouldn't) disassociate one from the other because when you do that, you get people stepping on each other's toes and tripping them over and generally doing more harm than good. Which seems to be what happened in this case.
avatar
ElTerprise: I just wanted to point out that they are different organisations - by no means i wanted to disassociate one from the other. That's why i could agree with your post. What me bothers here is that he have two different organisations ruling over similar cases with different outcomes. So the question what applies in Europe or specifically the European Union then? Rulings form the ECHR of the CJEU?
ECHR is the top most body for people/person. except for state affairs the it is the ECJ, European court of Justice.

And all ECHR rulings a binding to all members of the Council of Europe.

And that is what this case is about the violation of somebodies else HUMAN RIGHTS. That´s why they decided like this. (because of inactivity of the owner)

Violation of somebodies else rights is not free speech.
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
tinyE: Well, thank god Hitler was right and the Holocaust was a lie or else this place might be in trouble.
avatar
darthspudius: You're going to be the downfall of GOG!
I have scientific proof that nigger brains are inferior.
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
zeroxxx: Europe is not a country.

GG geography.
avatar
8thSage: yes it is now thay won there independence

gg history
i kind of agree on that :D
europe was always 'different'
but since that EU stuff and EU currency, things went down the drain....

i guess that in x years all the other countries will have rights like we have now and we will have 'none' or severely resticted ones :D.
Things are shifting, and there's nothing or little we can do about.

Bad thing is, i still have to go many years, thats at least 15 to 25 years still to go on with all these 'changes'.
if i had been 80 now, i would have done a : "ah well ' :D but at this point i cant.
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
j0ekerr: I think the idea behind them is the same reason why we have a senate and a congress in most countries. Bear in mind I'm oversimplifying here since I have no idea and just a general view of what each other does. Feel free to correct me.

The theoretical explanation for those two separate bodies of government is to keep each other in check.

However in practice the senate is seen as mostly useless.
Well the ECHR only deals with human rights violations and it covers all of europe and not only the EU. I assume when it comes to human rights it can overrule the CJEU.

avatar
Goodaltgamer: ECHR is the top most body for people/person. except for state affairs the it is the ECJ, European court of Justice.

And all ECHR rulings a binding to all members of the Council of Europe.

And that is what this case is about the violation of somebodies else HUMAN RIGHTS. That´s why they decided like this. (because of inactivity of the owner)

Violation of somebodies else rights is not free speech.
I know that it isn't free speech - and that is covered in german law already. But i didn't know about it being the highest court for people.
Posted June 17, 2015
avatar
Nemorian: This is trouble brewing for quite a few sites, but I'd like to think GOG's community hasn't degraded so much that it'd be an issue for them.

Unless of course tinyE gets loose- oh... crap... it already did. Well, we're boned.
avatar
tinyE: You know I tell a lot of stupid jokes in here but there are a lot of people WAAAAAAAY more offensive than me. In fact, I'm usually the first one to chime in when some racist, sexist, homophobic ass-hound shows up.
true, i have seen worse on lots of forums, also saw lots and lots of banned people, these were full with hate speech,
so you aren't that bad yet, so keep it that way and you be fine.

sometimes a little funny joke has to be possible, but thats only my humble opinion.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionWebsites Are Liable For Users Comments (147 posts)(147 posts)
(147 posts)