Forum:Could this happen to us?
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > Could this happen to us?
Note: This topic has been unedited for 5361 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over.
This • • 
• 
• 20:30 • Tuesday, 16-03-2010
- Of course not! I'll just check the article on Australia, just in case *checking article* we're screwed. 20:34, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
- "The US-based owner of a satirical Wikipedia-style website may be charged under Australian law over a deliberately offensive article about Aborigines." ED=satire?—Sir ¬_¬ | Banter HOMOPHOBE!!!
NOTM 20:35, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Exactly. Could "we" be sued for offensive "satire"? • • • • 20:37 • Tuesday, 16-03-2010
- We could sue Australia for having an offensive name. Look at how close "Aus" is to "Ass"!—Sir ¬_¬ | Banter HOMOPHOBE!!! NOTM 20:39, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Ass, as in "Bilaam's Ass", is not offensive. Also, it's not "Australia," it's "Strya." • • • • 20:47 • Tuesday, 16-03-2010
- Uncyclopedia had some previous trouble for being a so-called "cyber-bullying menace". Uncyclopedia is a peaceful site: are purpose is not to insult innocent New Zealand school children. 20:52, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
- No, not for cyberbullying - For being offensive.. Just like "Canada," look how close it is to "Cunta." • • • • 20:57 • Tuesday, 16-03-2010
- I didn't mean that ED got in trouble for cyber bullying, I was just thinking that Uncyclopedia might get sued by a concerned cyber bullied kid's parent. by the way, I'm adding "cunta" to my varied dictionary of slang terms. 21:00, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Me neither. I meant we could get into trouble for having an article that somehow offends the subject enough to sue us.. Possible? Maybe. • • • • 21:18 • Tuesday, 16-03-2010
- It would depend on the jurisdiction of yourself and the offended subject and the respective laws therefore. It would also depend on the practical difficulties of tracking you down in order for you to be sued in the first place. Since this site makes a good faith effort to avoid blatantly illegal actions, (unlike E.D. which pretends it is not bound laws against libel, privacy invasion, and the like), the site itself would be (generally) safe from legal threats. --Mn-z 00:11, March 18, 2010 (UTC)
- Me neither. I meant we could get into trouble for having an article that somehow offends the subject enough to sue us.. Possible? Maybe. • •
- I didn't mean that ED got in trouble for cyber bullying, I was just thinking that Uncyclopedia might get sued by a concerned cyber bullied kid's parent. by the way, I'm adding "cunta" to my varied dictionary of slang terms. 21:00, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
- No, not for cyberbullying - For being offensive.. Just like "Canada," look how close it is to "Cunta." • •
- Uncyclopedia had some previous trouble for being a so-called "cyber-bullying menace". Uncyclopedia is a peaceful site: are purpose is not to insult innocent New Zealand school children. 20:52, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Ass, as in "Bilaam's Ass", is not offensive. Also, it's not "Australia," it's "Strya." • •
- We could sue Australia for having an offensive name. Look at how close "Aus" is to "Ass"!—Sir ¬_¬ | Banter HOMOPHOBE!!!
- Exactly. Could "we" be sued for offensive "satire"? • •
- "The US-based owner of a satirical Wikipedia-style website may be charged under Australian law over a deliberately offensive article about Aborigines." ED=satire?—Sir ¬_¬ | Banter HOMOPHOBE!!!
- Technically, any foriegn government could charge you depending upon their laws. So if he entered Australia, he could be charged. The main issue would be if the American courts would allow extradition, which I believe won't happen for constitutional and political reasons. --Mn-z 23:04, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Also, as a practical issue, if you keep your real world identity secret, it is very difficult for a foriegn government to charge you for your online activities. First, they would need to get your ip address from Wikia. Then they would need to use that to get your identity from your internet service provider. Both of these actions would require a court order.
- If my opinion, it appears the Australian government is not be attempting to charge a "random" U.S. for actions done in the U.S. under Australian law. Rather, the person in question has relatives in Sydney, so he is suffering a de facto ban on travel into Australia. --Mn-z 23:59, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I've already made that mistake, I disclosed my name, location and occupation, along with a couple of pictures of myself.. Holy shit. • • • • 06:07 • Wednesday, 17-03-2010
- Actually it is a little more than what Mnbvcxz has said - the way the legislation is written it states that if you publish anything within Australia that is defamatory to a particular racial group you could be charged as an individual for it. They could attempt an extradition order but given that the legislation is not echoed in the states that way the extradition order would fail, but if the individual in question were to come to Asutralian soil then they could be arrested for the crime and tried as a result. As to wether or not the case would progress beyond what has already been done and said is highly doubtful, however the reality still remains that as Australia is attempting to filter the traffic that comes into the country, anything which is deemed illegal by Australian law can be blocked. However ED, the same as Uncyc and Wikipedia, and a billion blogs, is edited by users, so trying to block this is near impossible. The reality lies in that ED have stopped the complainants from being able to edit the offensive material as they beieve that their right to free speech is above the right of these indivduals to not be the victims of hate speech. But for me to have to fight the Australian government to be able to access Uncyc or ED is a real possibility. Well, not for ED, as I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot barge pole. Oh, and in case I forget later, G'day mate. Shrimp, barbie, blah blah. User:PuppyOnTheRadio/deb Thursday, 01:20, Mar 18 2010 UTC
- Well, I've already made that mistake, I disclosed my name, location and occupation, along with a couple of pictures of myself.. Holy shit. • •
Another thing that could happen to us
This • • • • 21:38 • Tuesday, 16-03-2010
- Quote from the article "The accused got to his feet and was standing over the police officer exposing his penis and thrusting it in her face, forcing her to take evasive action to avoid getting struck." Wow, just wow 23:43, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
Encyclopedia Dramatica
It will be interesting to see where this will go. Perhaps Puppy on the Radio could ask the Australian government to add Uncyclopedia on the banned list as some of the comments here make him cry (with anger or hilarity, doesn't matter which). --
RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 16:24, March 17, 2010 (UTC)
- In reality, if the Aus gov't is talking about banning access to ED, then there is a significant possibility that they could be talking about banning access here. I'm not about to start censoring what we have here, but there is a real possibility that I might never be able to post on he-The previous user, the Puppy formally known as On The Radio has been banned from being able to post on this site under Australian Law. Henceforth he shall been known as the debarked puppy.
- How formal was it? Did he have a tie? A suit?—Sir ¬_¬ | Banter HOMOPHOBE!!! NOTM
- Top hat and tails User:PuppyOnTheRadio/deb Wednesday, 21:45, Mar 17 2010 UTC
- How formal was it? Did he have a tie? A suit?—Sir ¬_¬ | Banter HOMOPHOBE!!!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Australia. *sniff* -OptyC Sucks! 
CUN21:27, 17 Mar
- The US is next. Prepare the tinfoil hats. • • • • 21:59 • Wednesday, 17-03-2010
- This MrN
Fork you! 01:51, Mar 18
- Doesn't apply. Australia is free to do whatever they want with their internets, no matter how retarded. There is no "they". As far as the US censoring the web, it's just not gonna happen. I hear we're pretty big on free speech or something. -OptyC Sucks!
CUN17:01, 18 Mar
- Have you read your Cybersecurity Bill? The one which has just recently passed in your country? Try doing a Google search on the words "Cybersecurity Bill". ... Then try reading what some people from some non-mainstream sources are saying about it. Then maybe read the bill. MrN Fork you! 17:36, Mar 19
- You mean this one? Introduced Tuesday? I'm not seeing where it's passed anything, nor do I see any intent to censor the internet for the average American. Also, limiting what we send to other countries =/= censoring the internet for Americans and Google =/= America as a whole. -OptyC Sucks! CUN19:18, 19 Mar
- You mean this one? Introduced Tuesday? I'm not seeing where it's passed anything, nor do I see any intent to censor the internet for the average American. Also, limiting what we send to other countries =/= censoring the internet for Americans and Google =/= America as a whole. -OptyC Sucks!
- Have you read your Cybersecurity Bill? The one which has just recently passed in your country? Try doing a Google search on the words "Cybersecurity Bill". ... Then try reading what some people from some non-mainstream sources are saying about it. Then maybe read the bill. MrN
- Thanks for your support Opty. I understand that American policy will never restrict free speech and American based companies will uphold this in all countries, regardless of local law. User:PuppyOnTheRadio/deb Thursday, 21:01, Mar 18 2010 UTC
- Don't take it personally, I just still haven't gotten over the whole Crocodile Dundee thing. -OptyC Sucks! CUN21:08, 18 Mar
- Haven't you ever played knifey-spoony before? User:PuppyOnTheRadio/deb Thursday, 22:06, Mar 18 2010 UTC
- Don't take it personally, I just still haven't gotten over the whole Crocodile Dundee thing. -OptyC Sucks!
- You do know that many of our users are from outside the USA? --Mn-z 02:43, March 19, 2010 (UTC)
- Two? --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!) 06:07, March 19, 2010 (UTC)
- Doesn't apply. Australia is free to do whatever they want with their internets, no matter how retarded. There is no "they". As far as the US censoring the web, it's just not gonna happen. I hear we're pretty big on free speech or something. -OptyC Sucks!
- This MrN
Our site has been baaned in a country beofre
I read it in Wikipedia. Our site is banned in China. But who likes communists anyways--
Director
WILL
YOU 333 02:49, March 19, 2010 (UTC)
- True, but the joy of that is that there are tunnels through the firewall there, so at least the people there can get access to us, even if it is illegal. I love the fact that looking at Uncyclopedia can be considered a rebellious act over there. Vive le revolution! User:PuppyOnTheRadio/deb Friday, 03:24, Mar 19 2010 UTC