IMHO the three strikes rule is unworkable. As Ken suggested, maybe not
in so many words, ONE strike could land one or all of the janitors in
prison, or fined out of existence. And that is definitely not acceptable
as a risk. Even more so for those who provide hosting free of charge.
It is not censorship to remove something that would destroy their lives.
It is just sensible.
The janitors do not owe us any debt of care.
And freedom of speech has hard limits. Anybody who thinks it does not is
living on cloud cuckoo land.
On 08/05/2022 22:58, sp0rus wrote:
The solution seems simple enough. We just make Ken and the other
janitors/hosts/patrons fabulously wealthy so that the law is no longer of
consequence.
Barring the community implementing that, I'd say that censorship for the
sake of censorship is one thing, but not publishing something that would
land the responsible party in legal hot water is another.
I feel that Ken and others have acted in good faith in the past and would
likely say they've regularly not agreed with things creators have said on
their shows. The beginnings of HPR were before my time in the community,
but I don't believe Ken or others agreed that they'd take the legal bullets
for creators as part of volunteering to help HPR run. I would be
interested in knowing more of the particulars of how the content of these
shows would be a legal issue for HPR's managers, but from what I've seen of
how things are handled I also have some level of trust that they aren't
blowing smoke when these claims are made.
I think this three strikes rule has some merit, but is probably worth more
discussion from the community on how exactly it should be worded and
implemented. Since we ask for hosts to self-censor themselves, how would
we make sure we aren't putting shows out that would cause legal troubles
without having some sort of board to listen to them all and vet them? You'd
likely need to have legal counsel to know for sure. It seems like a
possible slippery slope from there to not publishing things because of fear
of reprisals even if it wouldn't actually be illegal.
That said, I'm fairly certain that in some locales there wouldn't be legal
issues for the publisher of the content, but I'm also not a lawyer and know
that the people who are part of HPR encompass many legal jurisdictions that
likely work in many different ways. I know there have been many debates
regarding US law and platforms vs publishers and who is responsible.
Typically these debates I've seen have been regarding social media.
The unfortunate reality that I have to remind myself often is that what may
be legal for some people is not going to be for others. Just because you
may be able to legally do something where you are doesn't make it fair to
require those in another jurisdiction to be left holding the bag when the
cops come calling.
Unfortunately, this is an area (like many) where I don't feel I'm able to
offer any solutions, but would like to say that I appreciate how these
stickier issues tend to be handled by the HPR community and staff. While I
don't know that I've ever seen everyone 100% agree, there's almost always a
level of respect to the discourse that makes me quite proud to have even a
small connection to this community.
Thank you to all who have made and continue to make HPR what it is.
sp0rus
On Sun, May 8, 2022, 4:14 PM Mike Ray <m...@raspberryvi.org> wrote:
And having just read the other comments...
Voltaire does not matter when ONE strike would get Ken landed in prison.
As much as we hate it, there are rules about stuff like using
copyrighted material, or acts of slander or defamation on public media.
The only people who get away with breaking the law repeatedly are either
Donald Trump or Conservative MPs and ministers.
And they have deep pockets.
On 08/05/2022 22:09, Mike Ray wrote:
IMHO any show that contains stuff that might get the janitors into
bother legally should be canned.
And repeat offenders should be barred.
Obviously I don't know about the content. But what I do know is anything
like this that I created and which came to the attention of my employers
would get me the sack.
Mike
On 08/05/2022 19:28, Ken Fallon wrote:
Hi All,
You may remember
<
http://hackerpublicradio.org/pipermail/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org/2022-March/015174.html>
that back in March a host submitted a show that we had some problems
with. We didn't go into details at the time as I wanted to give the
host the benefit of the doubt. Suffice to say that were the show
posted, I was looking at a considerable fine and up to a year in
prison. In the end the host got back to us and decided to post it else
where. As it turns out that platform also did not post the content in
my region for the same reasons.
We now have another show from the same host and it has content that
would bring us other legal issues, as well as violating the terms and
conditions of our hosting providers. The host is not responding to my
emails, presumably they are out camping again.
While our policy on censorship states "We do not vet, edit, moderate
or in any way censor any of the audio you submit," it continues ",we
trust you to do that
<https://hackerpublicradio.org/stuff_you_need_to_know.php#not_moderated>."
While this host was given the benefit of the doubt the first time, I
feel that by immediately posting another show like this they have
betrayed the trust of the Janitors, Hosting Providers, Patrons, and
the wider HPR community.
As you can imagine even having the show in the future feed is a bit
risky, but we can not allow it to hit the main feed until the entire
HPR community has had time to decide how to proceed. We will bring
this up on the next community news and allow discussions as to how we
deal with this stuff going forward. Up until now it has not been
necessary but alas apparently now it is.
So I am once again asking you to allow me to move the problem show out
so the host has time to get back to me.
FYI: The cc list has been included on all correspondence.
_______________________________________________
Hpr mailing list
Hpr@hackerpublicradio.org
http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
--
Michael A. Ray
Software engineer
Witley, Surrey, South-east UK
He/him/cis
"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when
there is nothing left to take away." -- A. de Saint-Exupery
_______________________________________________
Hpr mailing list
Hpr@hackerpublicradio.org
http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
--
Michael A. Ray
Software engineer
Witley, Surrey, South-east UK
He/him/cis
"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when
there is nothing left to take away." -- A. de Saint-Exupery
_______________________________________________
Hpr mailing list
Hpr@hackerpublicradio.org
http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
