Comments on: This Is the End, Beautiful Friend

By: Joel Thomas

Joel Thomas — Thu, 03 Nov 2005 00:34:35 +0000

Bene,

Since my God Blog posts no longer identify me as the author, I would request that you delete them.

By: Joel Thomas

Joel Thomas — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:19:52 +0000

If Hewitt is correct about libel exposure, then perhaps there should be legislation that provides somewhat more freedom to bloggers while still protecting those who might be libeled. I don’t know what such legislation might be, however. It wasn’t just libel that Hewitt raised, however. He was also concerned about commenters who post copyrighted material in their comments and what exposure bloggers have as a result.

I know that I won’t allow a church newsletter to go out without my review because in the past I’ve found instances of well-meaning church folks, not understanding about copyright law, putting in poetry, etc. that is still under copyright protection.

By: Bene D

Bene D — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 04:44:29 +0000

It’s your post Joel, I apologize.
David, I’m sorry for butting in, a clarification of a bill and the criminal code of Canada wasn’t where you were going.
I’m gone.

By: Joel Thomas

Joel Thomas — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 03:18:36 +0000

Bene,

I don’t think it is considered shouting to capitalize just one word. I do it all the time, particularly if HTML is disabled.

I come down on the side of absolute free speech except for the understandable “yelling fire in crowded theater” and child pornography type exceptions.

I do believe that individual corporations, universities, etc. have the right to enact reasonable language and standard of behavior codes for the work place and classroom, however.

By: Bene Diction

Bene Diction — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 02:17:20 +0000

No need to yell Joshua.

By: Joshua Claybourn

Joshua Claybourn — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 00:58:32 +0000

In America you may sue someone for anything. But most suits are thrown out immediately, particularly in Constitutionally protected areas such as speech. Therefore you may be more likely to be sued in America, but you are much more likely to be SUCCESSFULLY sued in Canada.

By: Bene Diction

Bene Diction — Mon, 17 Oct 2005 22:36:13 +0000

Hi David:

Yes, our hate speech laws are different than they would be in the US.
They fall under the federal criminal code and an amendment under Bill C- 250.
This bill is misunderstood by many. In adding sexuality it protects all people, not ‘just’ gay.
It is also misunderstood that religious speech is not covered under this bill. Speech motivated by religion (under C-250) is exempt as hate propaganda.
Sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code deal with hate propaganda.

Basically there are four components:
color, race, religion or ethnic origin

If someone lodged a complaint it could go before a human rights tribunal. If that was unsatisfactory to the injured party they could request to go before the court.

I’m far more likely to see a civil suit by an angry American (or Canadian) than that to have to deal with a tribunal or a Canadian court.

It is merely prudent to monitor comments David, no matter what country one is in.

By: David Wayne

David Wayne — Mon, 17 Oct 2005 16:58:05 +0000

Joel - nothing to add, that’s a great summary and content. Thank you for it.

One little side note - it also irritates me that Hugh and some other bloggers of note don’t have comments. At the same time I have always figured that big time bloggers like them might not want them because they will attract too much crap. So, I have understood.

However, I had a conversation with Denise O’Leary who blogs from Canada and she said some things very similar to Hugh. There are some hate speech laws in Canada which could kick in on her even if the “hate speech” came from a commenter. She still allows comments but has to monitor them very carefully.