I don't know of a case of hate speech under UK law that has been brought by a 
non-UK resident. Looking online tends to push you towards information regarding 
extradition, but that's not really what we are talking about.

This week laws against revenge porn came into force within the UK with a 
potential sentence of two years. Since revenge porn is mostly committed online 
then I would have said yes, if the perpetrator is a UK citizen, acting online 
within the UK against someone abroad then I would have thought they could be 
prosecuted by the UK.

This is an article in The Independent about the new law coming into force, the 
last paragraph seems to hint that that would be the case: 
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/revenge-porn-criminalised-what-is-it-and-what-are-the-consequences-10042291.html
 "The apparent leaking of nude images of celebrities including Jennifer 
Lawrence and Kate Upton, who had their private accounts hacked and which thrust 
the issue into the limelight, would also be classified as revenge porn."

A couple of other points to note, does 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_legal_threats refer to criminal as 
well as civil law? The UK has no such thing as District Attorneys or pre-trial 
hearings, preliminary hearing etc., so I get lost around US law. Cases in the 
UK are brought by the police and then the file is passed to the Crown 
Prosection Service. The CPS the decides whether to go ahead, it bases that 
decision on (a) is there enough evidence for there to be a reasonable chance of 
conviction, and (b) is the case in the public interest.

I heard about a case some years ago where three men went out for the night, two 
of them got into a physical scrap in he middle of the street which became quite 
violent. The third man made a few attempts to break up the fight. Eventually 
they cooled off and all three went home. No crime was reported, there was no 
threat of legal action by any of the parties, but the whole thing had been 
caught on CCTV. The police arrested the two men and the one of them was jailed 
for attempted murder.

If a concerned member of the public, not necessarily an editor, brought hate 
speech by a British editor to the attention of the police in the UK, then the 
police might arrest that editor and the Crown Prosection Service could bring 
charges using the evidence which is available online. As far as I know it would 
not require any action or any threat of action on the part of the other editor 
concerned.

Marie

Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 21:22:35 +0000
From: jayen...@gmail.com
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

David Auerbach in Slate on "The Wikipedia Ouroboros":
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2015/02/wikipedia_gamergate_scandal_how_a_bad_source_made_wikipedia_wrong_about.single.html

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 1:40 PM, WereSpielChequers 
<werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Marie,
Surely this would cover more than just examples where both parties were in the 
UK? For example if the victim was anywhere in the world but the offender was in 
the UK, wouldn't the UK law apply?


Regards
Jonathan Cardy

On 30 Jan 2015, at 16:46, Marie Earley <eir...@hotmail.com> wrote:




There is something I thought I should mention as a UK member of this list. 

Hate speech (including online) is illegal in the UK.

When the Bank of England announced that Elizabeth Fry would be dropped from the 
new £5 notes and replaced with Winston Churchill, it meant that there would be 
no women on sterling bank notes (apart from the Queen).

Caroline Criado-Perez successfully campaigned for Jane Austin to be added to 
£10 notes and received threats of rape and death. 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10207231/Woman-who-campaigned-for-Jane-Austen-bank-note-receives-Twitter-death-threats.html

That instigated an online campaign which resulted in Twitter adding its 
'report' button.

Isabella Sorley, 23, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, tweets included: "die you 
worthless piece of crap", "go kill yourself" and, "I've only just got out of 
prison and would happily do more time to see you berried!!"

John Nimmo, 25, of South Shields, made references to rape and added:  "I will 
find you (smiley face)".

Sorley was sentenced to 12 weeks 
in prison, and Nimmo was jailed for 8 
weeks. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25886026 

The law they broke was Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127 

If UK-based Wikipedian 'X' breaches s.127 of the Comms. Act due to something 
they said on Wikipedia about UK-based Wikipedian 'Y' then they face criminal 
prosecution and possibly jail. 

The litmus test is whether what they have said is not only 'offensive' but, 
'grossly offensive'. Wikipedia's internal systems and thresholds would make no 
difference to the authorities in the UK. It would be interesting to see what 
the public fall-out would be if Wikipedia decided that no action should be 
taken against X whilst the UK jailed him / her.

Marie


Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:41:36 -0500
From: neot...@gmail.com
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case

Double standard.  Where are all the usual voices protesting about "civility 
police"?  Where are all the arbitrators opining that they cannot set objective 
standards for language?

Beeblebrox used to have an article about "fuck off" in his user space.  It 
didn't get him banned. In fact, he went on to become an administrator and 
arbitrator. 

In the absence of objective standards, subjective standards are emerging, based 
on gender.  Using the f-word, or even criticizing male users, is becoming a 
male privilege on en.wp.  Anyone else who uses the word is "hostile" and 
exhibiting "battleground behavior". I must also say I am very disappointed in 
GorillaWarfare's role here.

Maybe, just maybe, instead of just dismissing anything that is said by a woman 
editor, the arbitration committee should investigate it. I am looking in 
particular at this one 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&diff=prev&oldid=631322169
 If it is true, there are a huge number of users recruited on external sites, 
who are not there to build an encyclopedia, that will have huge implications 
for the survival of women editors on Wikipedia. The arbitration committee is 
looking at WP:SPA, they should look at WP:MEAT. And they should pay attention 
to who the ringleaders are, not just the throwaway accounts.  
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women&diff=next&oldid=10928257
 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women&diff=10938964&oldid=10936831
 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women&diff=10952260&oldid=10951344
 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants:IdeaLab/WikiProject_Women&diff=10991140&oldid=10979378
  

But, as has been pointed out on the current RFC, 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Harassment#RfC:_should_the_policy_extend_harassment_to_include_posting_ANY_other_accounts_on_ANY_other_websites.3F
 that would change the WP:OUTING policy to prohibit all mention of 
outside accounts, including Reddit Men's Rights and Reddit Gamergate, "trying 
to address the issues without being able to talk openly about the evidence is 
difficult".

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Marie Earley <eir...@hotmail.com> wrote:



I don't know a lot about this case, but taking a cursory look at the diffs...

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gamergate_controversy&diff=prev&oldid=628547686
 

...presumably an "excessive edit" is a derogatrory way of saying "a single 
large edit". In which case I would probably have said the same as this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gamergate_controversy&diff=prev&oldid=628548723
 

To be feminist or to not be feminist...

I once read about a mother who went into a toy shop with her little girl. She 
was walking towards the check-out with a toy fire truck and some Lego when she 
was stopped by a member of staff who pointed out that the store had dolls. The 
mother said that her daughter didn't like dolls, that she likes trucks. She was 
about to move off again when the staff member pointed out that the store sold 
pastel Lego (as opposed to the primary coloured bucket of Lego that she had 
picked up). I'm sure she didn't think of herself as a feminist until that 
moment.

I find that most people who join feminist groups / gender gap mailing list etc. 
never thought of themselves as feminists until they had a "Lego moment".

My Lego moment was reading this article: 
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/fashion-news/the-wag-wannabes-949827
 about a 19 year-old who was hoping to become the wife or girlfriend of a 
footballer (soccer player). 
>"The lifestyle is amazing. Nice house, expensive cars. Wherever 
footballers go they are recognised and 
>have people looking up to them. 
They know they can be with anyone - it's a privilege when they pick 
you." 

Marie


> Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 19:24:12 -0500
> From: carolmoor...@verizon.net
> To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] press coverage of Gamergate arbcom case
> 
> On 1/25/2015 6:17 PM, Nathan wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > I think the lesson it sends is that a righteous cause is not a defense 
> > against accusations of disruption, nor a license to violate other 
> > policies. I'm sure that among the restricted people are those with 
> > positions I'd support along with many others, but that doesn't put 
> > their behavior above reproach. Tony Sidaway was hardly the paragon of 
> > a calm and thoughtful administrator - insightful as he often was, 
> > there was a reason he was fired as a clerk and barred from simply 
> > requesting his bit back.
> The problem being that ArbCom is so political that most members see 
> editors they dislike/disagree with on issues/content as disruptive even 
> if their disruption is minor compared to that of the editors they feel 
> more sympatico with.  And of course if the "community" (i.e.,  gangs of 
> editors who are allies) decide to target someone it's just easier 
> politically to sanction those persons than not. And if they have a lot 
> of supporters it is safer NOT to sanction them.
> 
> This issue was very clear in GGTF arbitration where a few people were 
> targeted by most posters, over and over for the same issues, at least 
> til the end when an Arbitrator added a couple more needing sanctions.  
> It's less clear in Gamergate because there are more participants being 
> targeted by many more participants on many different issues.
> 
> CM
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please 
> visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
                                          

_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap                          
          
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________

Gendergap mailing list

Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap                          
          
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Reply via email to