Article in The Telegraph
Earlier today,in the UK District Judge Andrew Shaw ordered nine people to pay footballer, Ched Evan's, rape victim £624 (997.3392 US Dollars) after they admitted disclosing her identity on Twitter and Facebook. They were charged with publishing material likely to lead members of the public to identify the complainant in a rape case (an offence under the Sexual Offences (Amendments) Act 1992.
These days, whether it’s on a social media website or in relation to an online article, we all expect to have our say and post our own content. The legal position of an individual who posts content online (whether on Facebook, Twitter, on comment sections of online news pages) is clear. He or she is responsible for that content. Today's case is notable because the defendants were not aware that naming the lady was a criminal offence. This was irrelevant: ignorance was not a defense.
When we post material online, we act as publishers and our publications are subject to the same laws as those of professional publishers, such as newspapers. We are likely to see a proliferation of these sorts of cases, with the Attorney General and the Crown Prosecution Service taking action against individuals, teaching them the basics of publishing law. The message we are hearing from the courts is that the public cannot treat Twitter and Facebook as they would a casual chat in the pub.
No comments:
Post a Comment