• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

EU to Ban Free Speach on the Internet?????????

ToBeMe

Diamond Member
Got this in an weekend newsbreif email..............and some of you say the U.S. is taking away freedoms????????
rolleye.gif


  • Move to Ban Net 'Hate Speech' Draws Praise, Concern
    Fri Feb 22,12:46 PM ET
    By Bernhard Warner, European Internet Correspondent

    LONDON (Reuters) - Authors of emails and Internet postings that contain racist or xenophobic material may face criminal charges under a proposed European Union treaty that is dividing the Internet and law enforcement communities.


    The proposal, drafted by the newly formed Council of Europe, would essentially outlaw the publishing of "hate speech" on the Internet. Welcomed by law enforcement agencies, it has been slammed by Internet firms as impossible to enforce.

    The agreement would create a comprehensive legal framework for international crimefighters as they strive to identify and prosecute cross-border hate crimes on the Internet, an area politicians are eager to crack down on in the wake of the September 11 attacks.

    "We must harmonize the laws first so that countries can cooperate in criminal investigations regarding the Internet," Peter Csonka, principal administrator at the Council of Europe, told Reuters on Friday. He added that many member states have already criminalized certain activities regarded as racist or xenophobic -- such as threatening any particular group on the grounds of race, color, religion, sex, etc. -- and that the treaty would seek to extend that onto the Net.

    FREE SPEECH OR RACIAL HATRED? The proposal has already provoked protest from civil liberties groups who maintain the proposal could criminalize free speech, and from some Internet firms concerned over liability issues.

    Csonka said that telecommunications firms and Internet service providers have contacted the council asking for clarification on whether they would be held liable for hate speech posted or emailed by their customers.

    Internet Service Providers (ISPs) typically operate a policy of "notification and takedown," in which they will remove sites containing objectionable material if it's first brought to their attention. Self-policing in this manner, they say, is the best way to tackle hate speech online.

    "It's almost impossible, and this is the consensus in the IPS community too, to monitor every single piece of Web space in the Internet community," said Paul Barker, director of corporate affairs at Freeserve, the British ISP owned by France's Wanadoo .

    Csonka said the liability concerns raised by ISPs and Web site operators have not yet been addressed.

    Civil liberty groups have also objected to the proposal, fearing it could bring the more rigorous anti-hate speech laws that exist in continental Europe to the more liberal UK and U.S.

    For example, it is unlawful to post or sell Nazi regalia or propaganda on the Internet in France and Germany, but there are few legal curbs in the U.S. and Britain.

    "This proposal will potentially outlaw free speech," said Malcolm Hutty, general director for Campaign Against Censorship on the Internet in Britain, or CACIB. "That would be a great infringement of civil rights."

    CACIB and sister organizations of online rights group, the Global Internet Liberty Campaign, have begun to formulate a campaign to raise awareness for the new policy.

    The Convention on Cybercrime is the fruit of unprecedented international cooperation, receiving input from 43 European countries plus Japan, Canada and South Africa.

    Drafted by the Council of Europe, a pan-European legal forum which works for the harmonization of laws across the continent, the treaty would need individual ratification by each before it is adopted into law. It has so far been signed, but not yet ratified, by 38 nations.

    The "hate speech" amendment is expected to be brought into the law this July, officials said.
 
This is to stop hate speech, not free speech. But then the hard thing is to define it.

The reason for it is to stop neo nazi's from spewing their hate and racism, there are laws in many europe currently that ban hate and racist groups and have been active for many years. I personaly dont see a problem with it, as long as it only goes over "hate speech"
 
They forgot to include the (except the Jews) part.

EU=Good
US=Bad

Repeat 100 times before bed each night and turn yourself into a European.
 


<< This is to stop hate speech, not free speech. But then the hard thing is to define it.

The reason for it is to stop neo nazi's from spewing their hate and racism, there are laws in many europe currently that ban hate and racist groups and have been active for many years. I personaly dont see a problem with it, as long as it only goes over "hate speech"
>>


Yeah, I reallize that, but, even as you pointed out, as well as the article itself, this could be used to halt expressions of speech in MANY forms......... it seems to be fairly board in its aspect and could encompass many, many forms of "free speech" depending upon the interpretation! Looking at this, it seems to be a far more threatening proposal than what a lot of people are implying the U.S. has done since 9/11!



<< such as threatening any particular group on the grounds of race, color, religion, sex, etc. >>


This one point of this new law could come back to bite people in MANY ways....................
 
ToBeMe,
I know, it could be used in the wrong way. But I'm pretty sure it wont, mostly because of the years they have been in use over other forms of media. This is just the first law that goes over the Internet.
In some way I'm disapointed becuase, I sortof want the Internet to be "lawless"😛 just to see how a "society" would turn out if there were no laws.
 


<< This is to stop hate speech, not free speech. But then the hard thing is to define it.

The reason for it is to stop neo nazi's from spewing their hate and racism, there are laws in many europe currently that ban hate and racist groups and have been active for many years. I personaly dont see a problem with it, as long as it only goes over "hate speech"
>>



Thats where it starts Czar, next its other groups and other idiologies. This is a slippery slope road you do NOT want to take.
 


<< Thats where it starts Czar, next its other groups and other idiologies. This is a slippery slope road you do NOT want to take. >>


But without it groups that support what Hitler did might come to power and that is much worse, along with every other form of racial and hate filled motivated political groups.
 
Czar;
But really, that's no different than us here in the U.S. being "pretty sure" "The Patriot Act" and won't be handled the wrong way, but we sure got blasted on that one not????? If the wording is as broad as is being advertised, it sure leaves a LOT of open doors.........

This is new ground with the EU and all.............I'm not sure I'd be any more "worry free" about how this may be interpreted than any of the new "acts" put in to place here in the U.S..................
 
EU to Ban Free Speach on the Internet?????????

:Q :Q

Now now EU people. Make sure your house ain't got too much glass in it. 😉
 


<<

<< Thats where it starts Czar, next its other groups and other idiologies. This is a slippery slope road you do NOT want to take. >>


But without it groups that support what Hitler did might come to power and that is much worse, along with every other form of racial and hate filled motivated political groups.
>>



The price of freedom.
 
ToBeMe,
True, but you must start to trust authority somewhere and this law specificly says "hate and racial speech" it does not go over anything else. I'm pretty sure quite many people would want to get rid of the kkk since this law is made to target groups like that.
 


<< But without it groups that support what Hitler did might come to power and that is much worse, along with every other form of racial and hate filled motivated political groups. >>



Why not ban racist thought then? If someone looks like a racist, or if they look like a normal person but just because they are hiding the fact that they are a racist, just lock em up
rolleye.gif
Europe isn't filled with Nazistic governments now without this law is it?
 


<< Why not ban racist thought then? If someone looks like a racist, or if they look like a normal person but just because they are hiding the fact that they are a racist, just lock em up Europe isn't filled with Nazistic governments now without this law is it? >>


Because that is pointless, you cant ban thinking, you can only ban propaganda. It happened in Austria few years ago, a political group that supports Hittlers actions and thinks nothing wrong with it got a majority vote in one county and therefor got a man in congress.
 


<< ToBeMe,
True, but you must start to trust authority somewhere and this law specificly says "hate and racial speech" it does not go over anything else. I'm pretty sure quite many people would want to get rid of the kkk since this law is made to target groups like that.
>>


Czar...........I agree, but, can you disagree that this would be front page headline news and the U.S. would be ripped if it was us implementing this law????😉 The "KKK" is history as far as any power here in the U.S., and anyone foolish enough to belong to such are now ridiculed more so than those the organazation set out to hurt! I hope it works out.........it does concern me though, and the thing I was pointing out more than any other is, if this was happening here in the U.S., the thread would be pages long blasting the U.S. for banning the Freedom Of Speech!😉🙁 Agree?????😉
 
ToBeMe
hehe, response to a law like this would be totaly different in the US, no question about that. It is all about what you value the most, the US is based on the princible of freedom and nothing can and will get in the way of that, but in Europe I think that we are right now trying as hard as we can to not let history repeat itself and learning from past mistakes. That is why the EU is very slow in making decisions and new laws, trying not to make mistakes. It can be very anoying how slow it is but the end result is most of the time good.
 
Czar............glad we can agree on that!🙂 I hope this doesn't end up working against the people of the EU, but, I have to say, If I were still living tthere..............hell, even though I'm living back here now and have for many years, this whole EU thing kind of scares me. Not in the sense of a U.S. "Threat", but, I mean for you, the residents of the new "E.U.". It may bring you much broader economic power and strength, but, from what I've seen and know of the various countries which now make up the EU, there are wide varying opinions on several matters. It just seems like it *could* be a disaster waiting to happen especiaslly concerning the eventual E.U. "military" or "peace keeping force"............to many varying opinions in the region throughout history...........

As I've said before, I've spent time there and really like the countries and *most* of the people.................it just seems to me, knowing the history and people, at least to an extent, that this is going to be hard to hold together for the long haul, and sweeping laws which cover the whole EU may be where problems begin to develope wouldn't you agree????
 
The EU scares me to, and Iceland isnt even a part of it. The problem with the EU is that it tries to cut the border and independance from countries, that is the biggest threat. There is basicly one reason why Iceland isnt a part of EU and that is that if we would join then EU would control the fishing area around Iceland and giving that up is like "over our dead bodies😛".

I just hope that countries in Europe start to back the EU up fully because it is the best way to go right now, each country in Europe is just to small if it has to deal with the world.
 


<< Czar...........I agree, but, can you disagree that this would be front page headline news and the U.S. would be ripped if it was us implementing this law????😉 The "KKK" is history as far as any power here in the U.S., and anyone foolish enough to belong to such are now ridiculed more so than those the organazation set out to hurt! I hope it works out.........it does concern me though, and the thing I was pointing out more than any other is, if this was happening here in the U.S., the thread would be pages long blasting the U.S. for banning the Freedom Of Speech!😉🙁 Agree?????😉 >>



Agree 100%! Pages, and pages. But here's the major problem, it would be very hard to actually track down perpetrators of this crime (if it becomes law) and as Americans we can't support it. That would be hypocrisy on our part. We are for the spreading of democracy (and our beliefs) world-wide. Unfortunately, that means we have to put up with groups like the KKK. It is their right to spout it and (thank god) it is our right to ridicule them when they do! When you take away their right you are one step closer to taking away ours.

VP
🙂
 
There should not be any censorship of any kind, even if a web site is spewing nothing but hateful rhetoric. Allowing a hate group to expose themselves is the best way to discredit them.
 
What if I hate the hate speech ban, and write a hateful post against it?

Be VERY careful, folks. When you oppress one, you oppress all. You cannot single out speech you don't like and ban it, for someday someone wont like what you have to say.
 
Back
Top