Libel threat to force US papers (& Ebooks/Websites) out of Britain

[Bilbo1967]

Originally Posted by Teddman

The UK has basically become Orwell's 1984. There's a camera on practically every lamp post.

Any chance of explaining what the relevance of that comment is?

[Patricia]

I should point out that there is no problem accessing US newspapers online in the UK. I frequently read the Washington Post, among others.
It may be possible to deny access to paper copies (which are sold in a lot of large towns in the UK), but the online versions would continue to be available, even if only by proxy.
Actually, I think that the people who would be hardest hit by a denial of US news media would be American tourists and other ex-patriates.

[Teddman]

Originally Posted by Bilbo1967

Any chance of explaining what the relevance of that comment is?

Paints a larger picture of the nanny state the UK has become and further highlights the difference in civil liberties compared to America, libel laws just being a small part of it.

EDIT: But I'd regret if my distaste for public surveillance were to drag this thread off-topic. Here's something more on the subject, what'd be the problem if an international person/company were to take this approach?

paul c wrote:
for heaven's sake, just refuse to recognise that the English courts have jurisdiction... the moment you start defending yourself is the moment you've let them get a hold on you. They may get a default judgement, but just refuse to ever visit UK again... I'm pretty sure you can't be extradited for a civil case...

From the comments of this Times Online article:Libel tourists flock to 'easy' UK courts

[Kosst Amojan]

Look, I don't like that the UK doesn't protect the freedom of speech as well as the US but then again, it's not my country. However the UK is a friendly country that has close economic, military, and cultural ties with us that I would not like to see damaged.

If Britain does not reform its laws in this area though some of those ties might be harmed. For the past few years publishers have been pressing Congress to grant protection from overseas libel tourism lawsuits, from what I've read legislators have been waiting for Britain to reform those laws themselves because the alternative would seriously affect legal cooperation between our two nations. No one wants that to happen but it might.

[Teddman]

Well, since my last post I've learned that New York, Illinois, and California have all recently passed laws explicitly stating that the UK's libel statues are unenforceable in their states. So legal cooperation has already been seriously derailed between the U.S. and UK on this matter.

If you live in those three states, you have nothing to fear from UK libel laws...

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by zelda_pinwheel

i wish france would ban people like Michael Savage, if that wikipedia article is accurate. but i guess we'd have to start with LePen, and since he's already here that makes it trickier. i'm rather tempted to go and buy a few british products right now to show my support.

*THAT* is too funny!!! Expecting Wiki to be 'accurate'!

Please! Stop! You're *killing* me here!

Derek

[CallOfCth'reader]

Originally Posted by delphidb96

*THAT* is too funny!!! Expecting Wiki to be 'accurate'!

Please! Stop! You're *killing* me here!

Derek

You seemed to have missed ZP's "if that wikipedia article is accurate".

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by Patricia

You are notorious on this forum for anti-French sentiments, and now are adding the UK to your list.

This is an international forum. I wonder whether you have ever thought of the effect of your words on non US members?
Many people will read them and think one or more of the following:

(i) all Americans are total idiots (which would be a regrettable and extremely inaccurate generalisation).
(ii) Americans are unable to understand political cultures other than their own. (I don't believe this is true.)
(iii) American Imperialism knows no bounds. (I hope this isn't true either)
(iv) Delphid says some things that betray an extremely limited and provincial attitude. (Judge for yourself.)

Have you, by any chance, read your EU declaration of human rights? Have you noticed the pesky freedom of speech stuff in it? (Granted, both what the UN and the EU put forth as protection of what we in the US call 1st Amendment rights is rather mild, but still, it's an *attempt*.) Now I've *listened* to Michael Savage. I'm no supporter of most of what he advocates, but it does NOT fall into the range of advocating criminal behavior.

BTW, nowhere do I claim to think the average Brit is as bleeding STUPID as the current crop of MPs are proving themselves to be. I grant that the UK doesn't have the Bill of Rights and has come to believe that the near-police-state surveillance they now endure is, somehow, making them safer, but that's not a sign of stupidity.

Now, do I sometimes show a level of provincialism, nay backwoods, down-home, American hickism? Sure. I'm proud to be a bumptious American who believes that too much government is a bad thing, that the Bill of Rights *is* a better document than anything currently out there, that the rights of the individual trumps the "rights" of any government.

Further, I'll state right out that I tend to get cantankerous when a company goes on record as constantly promising a firmware update that never quite materializes is a 'bad thing' which WILL result in lower product sales - and that in the US (Up until Bush Jr. and Obama) this resulted in the company FAILING, and rightly so. It appears that people in France have a more 'placid' approach to such dismal customer support - and it appears that we're being trained to such in the U.S.

So sue me.

Derek

P.S. I can't believe our elected officials, starting way, way back when, long before I was born, thought it was okay to take 'imperialist' actions outside our borders - and I've been voting AGAINST the bastards every chance I get since I first got the vote in 1976. I'm a hard-core Libertarian and am often stunned at just how low our politicians have sunk these past few decades - including "The One".

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by CallOfCth'reader

You seemed to have missed ZP's "if that wikipedia article is accurate".

No, but that phrase implies a willingness to stipulate it's accuracy - which I find HIGHLY amusing!

Derek

[Kosst Amojan]

Originally Posted by delphidb96

Now, do I sometimes show a level of provincialism, nay backwoods, down-home, American hickism? Sure. I'm proud to be a bumptious American who believes that too much government is a bad thing, that the Bill of Rights *is* a better document than anything currently out there, that the rights of the individual trumps the "rights" of any government.

Amen!

[CallOfCth'reader]

Originally Posted by delphidb96

No, but that phrase implies a willingness to stipulate it's accuracy - which I find HIGHLY amusing!

Derek

No, it implies that the poster entertains the thought that the entry might be accurate, which then also implies that the poster entertains the thought that it might also not be accurate.

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by Kosst Amojan

Amen!

Your logo/avatar, which film is that from? I remember seeing the movie but I cannot remember its name.

Derek

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by CallOfCth'reader

No, it implies that the poster entertains the thought that the entry might be accurate, which then also implies that the poster entertains the thought that it might also not be accurate.

Quoting Wiki as even a possibly accurate source on anything relating to current political and entertainment affairs should be treated the same as mentioning Hitler and Nazis - end of discussion.

Derek

[CallOfCth'reader]

Originally Posted by delphidb96

Your logo/avatar, which film is that from? I remember seeing the movie but I cannot remember its name.

Derek

It's from an Outer Limits episode (I think). Something to do with him only wanting to read in peace, but always getting hassled. Then after a little nuclear war, with no one left alive to hassle him, and a library full of books, he treads on his glasses.

[CallOfCth'reader]

Originally Posted by delphidb96

Quoting Wiki as even a possibly accurate source on anything relating to current political and entertainment affairs should be treated the same as mentioning Hitler and Nazis - end of discussion.

Derek

Saying that doesn't make you right about ZP's original point. It just makes it seems as though you want to end the discussion.