Expulsion threat for under-age Facebook users

Ben Grubb, The Age,June 25, 2011

A NSW school whose students participated in a Facebook site used for cyber-bullying has threatened to expel students under 13 who are using the social networking site. In an email to parents the principal of Northern Beaches Christian School, Stephen Harris, warned that students registered on Facebook and under the social network's age limit of 13 would have their enrolment reviewed. Either children had lied about their age or their parents had helped them join Facebook, he said. ''Let me be very clear - it is an immense parenting mistake to allow for either to happen,'' Mr Harris wrote in the email sent on Tuesday.

Yesterday the Herald reported that thousands of Sydney students from various schools had joined websites on which teenagers had been subjected to malicious sexual slander and cyber-bullying. The Christian school's general manager, Alan Schultz, said yesterday that conversations on sites such as Facebook could ''become an Animal Farm-style environment''.

''It's just complete anarchy and so open then for bullying and all sorts of negative things to happen,'' he said. Having a child's enrolment reviewed was a ''last resort'', Mr Schultz said.

The Education Department has arranged for police to run a cyber-bullying workshop at a school attended by recent victims. The department also admitted that one of the schools whose students were bullied in the sexual slander postings had received a complaint from a parent earlier this month, but the email was deleted. The principal of the school said on Thursday she had not received complaints of cyber-bullying until contacted by the Herald. But the department conceded yesterday that a clerical officer at the school did recall receiving emails addressed to the school's email account that referred to Facebook. ''As such emails are often spam or contain viruses, these were deleted, without being read,'' a department spokesman said.

The father of a victim of the bullying has threatened to report administrators of the sexual slander pages to police if they do not remove the content. The father, who did not wish to be named, said he had sent emails to his child's school and others with students involved on June 16 but had received no reply.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/expulsion-threat-for-underage-facebook-users-20110624-1gjtv.html#ixzz1QGTJB9WC

LEAKED: UK copyright lobby holds closed-door meetings with gov't to discuss national Web-censorship regime

from Boing Boing by Cory Doctorow

A group of UK copyright lobbyists held confidential, closed-door meetings with Ed Vaizey, Minister for Culture, Communications and Creative Industries to discuss a plan to allow industry groups to censor the Internet in the UK. The proposal has leaked, and it reveals a plan to establish "expert bodies" that would decide which websites British people were allowed to see, to be approved by a judge using a "streamlined" procedure. The procedure will allow for "swift" blocking in order to shut down streaming of live events.

Public interest groups like the Open Rights Group asked to attend the meeting, but were shut out, presaging a regulatory process that's likely to be a lopsided, industry-centric affair that doesn't consider the public. The process is characterised as "voluntary," but the proposal makes reference to the Digital Economy Act, which allows for mandatory web-blocking (thanks to the action of LibDem Lords who submitted a proposal written by a record industry lobbyist as an amendment to the DEA).

The Open Rights Group has a campaign to repeal the DEA that you can sign onto.

"We would like confirmation from the government that these are genuine proposals which they are actively considering. We would also like to know what steps they will be taking to consider the views of organisations such as Open Rights Group, and those others who recently wrote to rights holders expressing their concern and requesting such proposals are made public.

So far these discussions have involved only rightsholders and Internet companies, with only in the most recent meeting involving Consumer Focus. (As Jim blogged yesterday, Consumer Focus' response to the proposals they discussed is here). This is a welcome concession. But it is a concession. Open policy making that takes on board the broadest range of views is not something within the gift of politicians but a responsibility they bear."

Premier League joins group lobbying for web blocking, proposing confused "voluntary" scheme - overseen by the courts (James Firth)

Rights holders' proposed voluntary website blocking scheme (Open Rights Group)

Response to 'Addressing websites that are substantially focused on infringement' working paper (Consumer Focus PDF)

29 WAYS TO STAY CREATIVE

from TO-FU on Vimeo.

Even if you’re a creative type, sometimes you just get stuck. This quick little two-minute video by To-Fu Motion Graphics gives you 29 ways to get unstuck. I bet #8 applies to a lot of us. Is there anything you’d add to the list? What gets you going when your inspiration is lacking?

29 WAYS TO STAY CREATIVE from TO-FU on Vimeo.

Twitter users and the courts go to war over footballer's injunction

Owen Bowcott and Josh Halliday, guardian.co.uk, Friday 20 May 2011 20.26 BST

• Article history

As Twitter users repeatedly named a footballer who has taken out a privacy injunction, Lord Judge warned that 'modern technology was totally out of control'. Photograph: Ian Nicholson/PA



Attempts to identify a famous footballer hiding behind a privacy injunction have spiralled into an online battle over freedom of speech, as internet users responded to high court action by repeatedly naming him on Twitter. The high court granted a search order against the US-based microblogging site on Friday as the lord chief justice, Lord Judge, warned that "modern technology was totally out of control" and called for those who "peddle lies" on the internet to be fined. The attempt to compel Twitter to identify those responsible for the breaches comes after a number of its users earlier this month purported to reveal the name of the player who allegedly had an affair with the model Imogen Thomas.

The footballer's legal team began its action in London on Wednesday. There is a suspicion that a media company may be linked to the postings on Twitter, which were put up nearly two weeks ago. But the name of the footballer was spreading even more rapidly across Twitter in defiance of the court injunction, setting the stage for a confrontation between the judiciary and cyberspace. Earlier Lord Judge – welcoming a juridical report on superinjunctions – said readers placed greater trust in the content of traditional media than those "who peddle lies" on websites. He urged that ways be found to curtail the "misuse of modern technology", in the same way that those involved with online child pornography were pursued by the police. "Are you really going to say that someone who has a true claim for protection perfectly well made has to be at the mercy of modern technology?" he asked. The lawsuit lists the defendants as "Twitter Inc and persons unknown". The "persons unknown" are described as those "responsible for the publication of information on the Twitter accounts".

Lawyers have applied for a court order that could force Twitter to hand over the name, email address and IP address of the person behind the account, the Guardian understands. The orders – known as a Norwich Pharmacal orders – are commonly used in illegal filesharing cases. The Guardian understands that the claim form, filed to the high court by the footballer's legal team, will not be made public until next week. Earlier this month, an unknown person or individuals published on a Twitter account the names of various people who had allegedly taken out gagging orders to conceal sexual indiscretions. The account rapidly attracted more than 100,000 followers.

Twitter said: "We are unable to comment." The London-based law firm representing the footballer had also not responded to a request for comment at time of publication. Twitter and other social networks were accused of making "an ass of the law" by the culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt, and politicians after a number of celebrities with injunctions were allegedly exposed online. The socialite Jemima Khan was among those alleged on Twitter to have obtained an injunction. Khan described as a "bloody nightmare" rumours suggesting falsely that she had obtained a gagging order to prevent publication of "intimate photos" of herself and the TV presenter Jeremy Clarkson.

Twitter has in the past said that it "strive[s] not to remove tweets on the basis of their content", but that it would remove "illegal tweets and spam". Previous defamation claims against the search engine Google failed on the grounds that it is not a publisher and not responsible for the contents of the blogs and articles listed in its search results. Richard Hillgrove, the owner of Hillgrove PR, which provides advice to celebrities, said that Twitter needed to be made as accountable as any other medium. "It has gone from 'the back bedroom' to mainstream medium. "Celebrities are being held to account if they Tweet commercial interests. It works both ways," he said.

Twitter faces legal action by footballer over privacy

Josh Halliday, guardian.co.uk, Friday 20 May 2011 19.00 BST

Article history

Twitter has been sued by a footballer in a privacy row. Photograph: Chris Batson/Alamy



Website faces action after users purported to reveal name of player who allegedly had affair with model Imogen Thomas

A footballer has launched legal action against Twitter after a number of the microblogging site's users purported to reveal the name of the player who allegedly had an affair with model Imogen Thomas. The footballer's legal team began the legal action at the high court in London on Wednesday, in what is thought to be the first action against the US social media firm and its users. The lawsuit lists the defendants as "Twitter Inc and persons unknown". The latter are described as those "responsible for the publication of information on the Twitter accounts" in the court document, according to reports.

Earlier this month, an unknown person or individuals published the names of various people who had allegedly taken out gagging orders to conceal sexual indiscretions on a Twitter account. The account rapidly attracted more than 100,000 followers. Twitter declined to comment. The lord chief justice, Lord Judge, on Friday said Twitter and its users were totally out of control when it comes to privacy injunctions and court orders. Although there was no mention of Twitter in Lord Neuberger's long-awaited report on superinjunctions, published on Friday, Lord Judge said readers placed greater trust in the contents of traditional media than in those "who peddle lies" on websites.

Twitter and other social networks were accused of making "an ass of the law" by culture secretary Jeremy Hunt and politicians after a number of celebrities with injunctions were allegedly exposed online. The socialite Jemima Khan was among those claimed on Twitter to have obtained an injunction. Khan described rumours, which had suggested falsely she had obtained a gagging order to prevent publication of "intimate photos" of herself and Jeremy Clarkson, as a "bloody nightmare". Twitter has said that it "strive[s] not to remove tweets on the basis of their content", but that it would remove "illegal tweets and spam".

Mark Stephens, a senior media lawyer at Finers Stephens Innocent, said the lawsuit had little hope of succeeding. "This is not only scraping the bottom of the barrel, this is beneath the barrel. This [injunction] information is already available on servers outside of this jurisdiction and on website outside this jurisdiction," he said. "You would have to be a moron in a hurry to suggest to this footballer that he throw good money and publicly excoriate himself yet further." Schillings, the London-based law firm representing the footballer, had not returned a request for comment at time of publication.