Difference between revisions of "If you want to criticize Europe"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "category:Top {{page/status/seed|I expect to have more examples at some point, but one link doesn't really make the case.}} Here's what Europe is ''actually'' doing wrong....") |
(h/t) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{page/status/seed|I expect to have more examples at some point, but one link doesn't really make the case.}} | {{page/status/seed|I expect to have more examples at some point, but one link doesn't really make the case.}} | ||
Here's what Europe is ''actually'' doing wrong. Funny how US right-wingers never bring up these points: | Here's what Europe is ''actually'' doing wrong. Funny how US right-wingers never bring up these points: | ||
| − | * '''2015-06-16''' [https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150616/11252831361/huge-loss-free-speech-europe-human-rights-court-says-sites-liable-user-comments.shtml Huge Loss For Free Speech In Europe: Human Rights Court Says Sites Liable For User Comments] "The court had found that <i>even if</i> a website took down comments after people complained, it could <b>still</b> be held liable because it should have <i>anticipated</i> bad comments in the first place. Seriously. In this case, the website had published what everyone agrees was a "balanced" article about "a matter of public interest" but that the website publisher <i>should have known</i> that people would post nasty comments, and therefore, even though it <i>automated a system</i> to remove comments that people complained about, it was still liable for the complaints." | + | * '''2015-06-16''' [https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150616/11252831361/huge-loss-free-speech-europe-human-rights-court-says-sites-liable-user-comments.shtml Huge Loss For Free Speech In Europe: Human Rights Court Says Sites Liable For User Comments] ([https://plus.google.com/+KeeHinckley/posts/RqHQCDniCYb via]) "The court had found that <i>even if</i> a website took down comments after people complained, it could <b>still</b> be held liable because it should have <i>anticipated</i> bad comments in the first place. Seriously. In this case, the website had published what everyone agrees was a "balanced" article about "a matter of public interest" but that the website publisher <i>should have known</i> that people would post nasty comments, and therefore, even though it <i>automated a system</i> to remove comments that people complained about, it was still liable for the complaints." |
Latest revision as of 01:51, 17 June 2015
| seed article |
|---|
| This article is under construction and should not be used as a reference. I expect to have more examples at some point, but one link doesn't really make the case. |
Here's what Europe is actually doing wrong. Funny how US right-wingers never bring up these points:
- 2015-06-16 Huge Loss For Free Speech In Europe: Human Rights Court Says Sites Liable For User Comments (via) "The court had found that even if a website took down comments after people complained, it could still be held liable because it should have anticipated bad comments in the first place. Seriously. In this case, the website had published what everyone agrees was a "balanced" article about "a matter of public interest" but that the website publisher should have known that people would post nasty comments, and therefore, even though it automated a system to remove comments that people complained about, it was still liable for the complaints."