New Zealand makes internet 'trolling' illegal

[Wilikon]

Supporters believe it will help mitigate the harm caused by cyber-bulling but critics say it is a threat to free speech


Internet trolls face up to two years' jail in New Zealand under a controversial new law which bans “harmful digital communications”.

And under a parallel amendment to New Zealand's Crimes Act, a person who tells another to kill themselves faces up to three years in prison.

The law will help mitigate the harm caused by cyber-bulling and give victims a quick and effective means of redress, supporters said.

But critics said the law harms free speech and its fine print could threaten public interest journalism in the country.

Under the Harmful Digital Communications Act in effect from this week, anyone convicted of “causing harm by posting digital communication” faces two years in prison and a $50,000 (NZ) (£6,500) fine, while businesses face fines of up to $200,000 (NZ).

Harmful communications can include truthful as well as false information, and “intimate visual recordings” such as nude or seminude pictures or video shared without permission.

The bill was introduced after a public outcry over the horrific "Roast Busters” scandal, in which a group of teenage boys from Auckland was accused of sexually assaulting drunk, under age girls and boasting about the acts on social media.

But in an editorial, New Zealand’s Dominion Post said while the law's intentions were good, it went too far and could "pick up in its drift-net the sorts of noise and criticism that make for the talk of a free society”.

Noting it effectively bans online communications judged “indecent”, “false” or “used to harass an individual”, the Post asked if reports on political expense scandals, or cartoons that mock religious figures, may also be banned under the legislation.

The bill passed the New Zealand parliament with an overwhelming 116 to 5 majority.

Speaking against the bill, Greens MP Gareth Hughes said while its intent was noble, its definition of “harm" was “irresponsibly broad”, and said the law could damage journalism in the country.

Arguing what was not an offence offline should not be an offence online, Mr Hughes criticised the fact reporters were not exempt from the legislation, which he said may prevent them publishing online the same story about a corrupt MP which would be perfectly legal to publish in a newspaper.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/newzealand/11725668/New-Zealand-makes-internet-trolling-illegal.html

[WhatTheGox]

Its silly but on the plus side at least the mainstream is now seeing what happens on the internet as worthy of consideration.  Maybe now they will do things like stop the war on drugs since anytime its brought up online 95% agree to end it.

[rexxarofmoknathal]

Reminds me of this news report, which I am ashamed to say, was part of our Toronto news station

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQkENXa9WNE

Awareness of cyber bullying and online threats is important, but sometimes it's taken way too far.

[cryptocoiner]

Trolling is a art.

[TECSHARE]

I propose we flood New Zealand with trolling so they can have a new understanding of how valuable free speech is, and how retarded trying to regulate it is.

[Balthazar]

Meanwhile RF is doing internet trolling on the country-wide scale:

http://appleapple.top/internet-isolation-of-the-crimea-how-mts-helps-residents-of-the-peninsula-to-circumvent-sanctions/

[jaysabi]

Under the Harmful Digital Communications Act in effect from this week, anyone convicted of “causing harm by posting digital communication” faces two years in prison and a $50,000 (NZ) (£6,500) fine, while businesses face fines of up to $200,000 (NZ).

Causing harm and intending to cause harm are two very different things. Trolling is more closely associated with intending to cause harm. So we have a law ostensibly seeking to criminalize intending to cause harm, but actually criminalizing causing any hurt feelings on the internet.

That's some law.

[Lethn]

As usual these fuckers know absolutely nothing about the internet and it's workings.

The bill was introduced after a public outcry over the horrific "Roast Busters” scandal, in which a group of teenage boys from Auckland was accused of sexually assaulting drunk, under age girls and boasting about the acts on social media.

That's not called being a troll, that's called being an asshole, trolls have class, they're basically sophisticated pranksters that only operate on the internet. Takes a lot to get me angry, but these assholes who are trying to using corporate media to essentially invade the internret are pissing me off big time, especially when they come along with bullshit narratives and phony political ideology.

[BillyBones]

This law will leads to kill our freedom of speech, but not all, taking strict actions against mocking religious figures is valid one, since it will hurt the divine faith sentiments of people, I guess they actually wants to implement that law for this specific religious purpose and to make it effectively they made it to all trolling words, politicians will get more benefit from this law.

[jaysabi]

As usual these fuckers know absolutely nothing about the internet and it's workings.

The bill was introduced after a public outcry over the horrific "Roast Busters” scandal, in which a group of teenage boys from Auckland was accused of sexually assaulting drunk, under age girls and boasting about the acts on social media.

That's not called being a troll, that's called being an asshole, trolls have class, they're basically sophisticated pranksters that only operate on the internet. Takes a lot to get me angry, but these assholes who are trying to using corporate media to essentially invade the internret are pissing me off big time, especially when they come along with bullshit narratives and phony political ideology.

"Trolls have class."

Probably the first time that's ever been stated. Don't believe it in the least.

[Wilikon]

Trolling is a art.

 

[Wilikon]

I propose we flood New Zealand with trolling so they can have a new understanding of how valuable free speech is, and how retarded trying to regulate it is.

how come 4chan is not on the case already? Dead?

[ShamrockHannah]

Why don't they focus on crimes which actually harm people? I know cyber bullying is a big problem but where do you draw the line between someone expressing themselves and someone actually being a troll.

They're probably just trying to frighten people to be honest. I doubt they put that many people in jail, they must likely will just get a fine or probation.

[Lethn]

The thing is they know that it's utterly stupid and pointless, but they want a law passed so they can target individuals that they happen to dislike, I see these kind of laws easily being used by misandrists for example who will inevitably cry about a couple of assholes spamming their accounts and then an entire group they don't like going to jail for it.

[TECSHARE]

The thing is they know that it's utterly stupid and pointless, but they want a law passed so they can target individuals that they happen to dislike, I see these kind of laws easily being used by misandrists for example who will inevitably cry about a couple of assholes spamming their accounts and then an entire group they don't like going to jail for it.

Exactly. This is why these laws should not be tolerated anywhere in the world.

[pisinos]

Trolling and bullying are 2 different things. Also, the real bulying in the real world is more dangerous than the cyber bullying.

[Lethn]

As usual these fuckers know absolutely nothing about the internet and it's workings.

The bill was introduced after a public outcry over the horrific "Roast Busters” scandal, in which a group of teenage boys from Auckland was accused of sexually assaulting drunk, under age girls and boasting about the acts on social media.

That's not called being a troll, that's called being an asshole, trolls have class, they're basically sophisticated pranksters that only operate on the internet. Takes a lot to get me angry, but these assholes who are trying to using corporate media to essentially invade the internret are pissing me off big time, especially when they come along with bullshit narratives and phony political ideology.

"Trolls have class."

Probably the first time that's ever been stated. Don't believe it in the least.

Compared to the assholes cited in the article? Yes, trust me, those are the ones that should be watched if any, the problem is the police, rather than looking at things logically, are basing their findings on political and ignorant hysteria rather than poking around the internet themselves and just learning about who the real psychopaths are and who aren't.

[TECSHARE]

As usual these fuckers know absolutely nothing about the internet and it's workings.

The bill was introduced after a public outcry over the horrific "Roast Busters” scandal, in which a group of teenage boys from Auckland was accused of sexually assaulting drunk, under age girls and boasting about the acts on social media.

That's not called being a troll, that's called being an asshole, trolls have class, they're basically sophisticated pranksters that only operate on the internet. Takes a lot to get me angry, but these assholes who are trying to using corporate media to essentially invade the internret are pissing me off big time, especially when they come along with bullshit narratives and phony political ideology.

"Trolls have class."

Probably the first time that's ever been stated. Don't believe it in the least.

Compared to the assholes cited in the article? Yes, trust me, those are the ones that should be watched if any, the problem is the police, rather than looking at things logically, are basing their findings on political and ignorant hysteria rather than poking around the internet themselves and just learning about who the real psychopaths are and who aren't.

It doesn't matter, because it is a bad law. Their job is to enforce the law, not interpret it, and bad laws will be enforced badly.

[BADecker]

The thing is they know that it's utterly stupid and pointless, but they want a law passed so they can target individuals that they happen to dislike, I see these kind of laws easily being used by misandrists for example who will inevitably cry about a couple of assholes spamming their accounts and then an entire group they don't like going to jail for it.

Exactly. This is why these laws should not be tolerated anywhere in the world.

And they don't have to be tolerated in New Zealand. Why not? Because New Zealand law is based on English common law.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/Map_of_the_Legal_systems_of_the_world_%28en%29.png

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Legal_System_Detailed_Map.pdf


American common law is different than English common law. American common law is a little easier. Here is how it works.

The 7th Amendment essentially allows any adult individual to require a common law jury trial for anything.

The 9th Amendment essentially states that no rights listed by the Constitution (or that flow out of the Constitution) diminish any rights that people had before the Constitution was put together.

When was the Constitution put together? It was before there was any legalese (legal language). It was put together using the common language of the people, which is the same thing that the common law uses. None of the definitions of any law or law book that came about following the institution of the Constitution was available at the time that the Constitution was ratified. Thus, all the common law had to do with the common language of the people. Since it is the common language, not the legalese language of the legal system, the common law of the people prevails.

Common law is on top, because the Constitution and the Bill of rights don't have any laws for the people. They have prohibitions for the government. And the rights of the people can't be diminished. And if anyone harms or damages another person, the only law that prevails is the common law of the jury. Thus the jury can judge both the legality of the legalese law and the guilt or innocence of a person or corporation accused.

This is it, period! This is foundational law in America, and the courts all know it. Now, you as a person have to KNOW it so that you can demand justice in the only way that applies - if you harm or damage someone, or if he does so to you.

New Zealand common law - and that of the U.K., and Canada, and Australia, and India, and a few other places - has an extra step in it that can make it a little more difficult, but also can make it a little harder for the courts to play with people at times. All in all, common law rules, and this means that a person can require his accuser to get on the stand and verify harm or property damage, and prove that it was the person accused who did it.

Legal laws don't apply much except that the person accused lets them.

[harlenadler]

Good laws, but they are practically impossible to enforce fairly and unilaterally. I mean, half of even this forum is full of trolls and scammers.

trolls have class