Monday, 30 July 2012

West tightens Internet censorship, says China

West tightens Internet censorship|Americas| "Western countries are tightening Internet censorship and implementing tougher cybermonitoring policies.
While governments tend to play the national security card to defend plans for wider state access to email and digital communications, analysts and Internet users are concerned that unwatched cybermonitoring might tip the delicate balance between online security and state surveillance." 'via Blog this'

Evidence of online copyright infringement? Proof or disproof

ORG Zine | Evidence of online copyright infringement? Who did that...: "Ultimately, without the NAT information, the subscriber is, on a technical level, not able to disprove the accusation that the infringement was committed by a computer within the household, or more precisely, their own computer. In a court, the copyright owners would have to prove their case, it is not the subscriber who has to disprove the allegation. But the small number of cases against consumers for infringement involving peer-to-peer filesharing that have been brought in UK courts have not been fully fought." 'via Blog this'

Friday, 27 July 2012

Twitter Joke Trial: Appeal Judgment Sees the Joke

Twitter Joke Trial: Appeal Judgment Sees the Joke: "The Divisional Court has given judgment in the appeal of Paul Chambers against his conviction under the Communications Act 2003, s 127. The Court of Appeal gave judgment on 27 July in Chambers v DPP [2012] EWHC 2157 – the much publicised 'Twitter joke' case. The appeal against conviction was allowed on the basis that this 'tweet' did not constitute or include a message of a menacing character.
The full judgment can be downloaded.
Lord Judge LCJ gave the judgment of the Court. He did not deal with each aspect of the wide-ranging questions posed by the Crown Court for decision but did agree with the Crown Court judge's analysis that a tweet was indeed a message capable of supporting a charge under the Act. However, he was clearly impatient with the support given by the magistrates and the Crown Court to the view that the message was menacing."
'via Blog this'