CyberLaw Blog

Archive for the ‘Hate Speech’ Category

Online Hate Sites Grow With Social Networks (New York Times)
Terrorists and racists are turning to online social networks and depending less on traditional Web sites, according to a new report on digital terror and hate speech. The report, by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, found a 20 percent increase in the number of hate and terrorist-abetting Web sites, social network pages, chat forums and micro-bloggers over the past year, to a total of 11,500.

March 16, 2010, 9:28 am
Online Hate Sites Grow With Social Networks
By STEVE LOHR

Terrorists and racists are turning to online social networks and depending less on traditional Web sites, according to a new report on digital terror and hate speech.

The report, by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, found a 20 percent increase in the number of hate and terrorist-abetting Web sites, social network pages, chat forums and micro-bloggers over the last year, to a total of 11,500.

“The real growth is where it is for everyone: in social networks,” said Rabbi Abraham Cooper, an associate dean at the center, a Jewish human rights group, which issued the report on Monday.

Longtime Web sites like Stormfront, which bills itself as a leading site of the “White Nationalist Community,” are still around and active, Rabbi Cooper said. But such sites have become the old-line media of online racism.

The annual report is intended as a “collective snapshot” of the activities of hate groups and terrorists online, Rabbi Cooper said. It is distributed as a CD-ROM, mainly to law enforcement agencies and nonprofit groups, instead of online because it includes terrorist tutorials, like video clips of bomb-making instructions.

“We don’t want to help the bad guys,” Rabbi Cooper explained.

The report is part of the center’s effort to raise awareness about hate groups, and the center urges Web users who encounter hate sites, videos or groups to e-mail links to ireport@wiesenthal.com. The center then contacts Web companies or law enforcement agencies, as appropriate.

“The goal is to get the collective genius of the Internet to help combat this problem,” he said.

(Via QuickLinks Update.)

Racist content on US server is within UK jurisdiction, says Court of Appeal: “The law of England and Wales applies to material published online, even if it is hosted on a server in another country, the Court of Appeal has ruled. As long as a substantial measure of the activities takes place in England, its law will apply, it said.”

(Via OUT-LAW News.)

Teenager admits incitement to racial hatred over YouTube videos

CPS, 17/02/2010

A 17-year-old youth has pleaded guilty to two charges of inciting racial hatred after he posted hate-filled videos on YouTube in what the Crown Prosecution Service says is the first case of its kind in England and Wales.

CPS lawyer, Viv Goddard said: ‘The teenager was just 15 when he was arrested on suspicion of posting white supremacist material on YouTube and a website he had set up himself.

‘This is thought to be the first time the CPS has prosecuted someone in England and Wales as young as this defendant for incitement to racial hatred after posting racially inflammatory material on a social networking site.

‘Young people need to realise that it is not a joke to post hate filled material on video sharing websites or sites they set up themselves. The material in this case was not just offensive but highly disturbing in its violence and imagery, particularly one clip which showed a Black man being hanged by the Ku Klux Klan then his leg being hacked off and thrown into a fire.

‘People are entitled to hold racist and extreme opinions which others may find offensive and obnoxious. What they are not entitled to do is to publish or distribute those opinions to the public in a threatening, abusive or insulting manner either intending to stir up racial hatred or in circumstances where it is likely racial hatred will be stirred up.’

Mrs Goddard said it was difficult for the youth to deny responsibility as he had either filmed himself expressing racist opinions or had supplied his own comments as a voice over.

She said: ‘To put this in context, on his own website, he insisted that those who wanted to view his site had to sign up to the following statements before they were allowed access.’

These statements were:

* I do swear and verify that I am of the white race
* I am not addicted to or a user of illegal drugs
* I am not or have never been a follower of the Jewish religion
* I believe in the segregation of the races and I have never engaged in an inter-racial relationship
* I believe in and will defend my Country, Homeland and its Constitution and laws.

Mrs Goddard said: ‘This case should highlight to other young people that if they put material like this on the internet they could end up with a serious criminal conviction which will follow them for the rest of their lives.

Ends
Notes to Editors

1. For further information contact CPS Press Office 020 7796 8105.
2. The date of birth of the defendant is 16 June 1992. He lives in North Norfolk.
3. He admitted two charges at Kings Lynn Youth Court on Wednesday, 17 February 2010:
On or before 22 April 2008 he distributed a recording of visual images and sounds, namely a video clip titled ‘niggers.avi ‘, that was threatening, abusive, or insulting, intending thereby to stir up racial hatred or whereby, having regard to all the circumstances, racial hatred was likely to be stirred up. Contrary to Sec 21 Public Order Act 1986.
On or before 22 April 2008 he distributed a recording of visual images and sounds, namely a video clip titled Clip046.avi, that was threatening, abusive, or insulting, intending thereby to stir up racial hatred or whereby, having regard to all the circumstances, racial hatred was likely to be stirred up. Contrary to Sec 21 Public Order Act 1986.
The maximum custodial sentence in the youth court is a detention and training order of no more than 24 months. On 20 November 2009 the Sentencing Guidelines Council published its definitive guideline ‘Overarching Principles Sentencing Youths’, which apply to offenders sentenced on or after 30 November 2009. Please see the SGC website at: http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/
4. The Crown Prosecution Service is the independent authority responsible for prosecuting criminal cases investigated by the police in England and Wales. It is responsible for:
Advising the police and reviewing the evidence on cases for possible prosecutionDeciding the charge where the decision is to prosecutePreparing cases for courtPresenting cases at courtThe CPS consists of 42 Areas in total, each headed by a Chief Crown Prosecutor (CCP). These are organised into 14 Groups, plus CPS London, each overseen by Group Chair, a senior CCP. In addition there are five specialised national divisions: Organised Crime, Special Crime, Counter-Terrorism, Fraud Prosecution, and Revenue and Customs. A telephone service, CPS Direct, provides out-of-hours advice and decisions to police officers across England and Wales. The CPS employs around 8,250 people and prosecuted 1,032,598 cases with an overall conviction rate of 86.6% in 2008-2009. Further information can be found on our website. More about the CPS
5. The DPP has published his long term vision for the prosecution service and its role within the wider criminal justice system. It includes modernising the service and increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of criminal justice – read ‘The Public Prosecution Service: Setting the Standard’ at www.cps.gov.uk/pps
6. The CPS, together with ACPO and media representatives, has developed a Protocol for the release of prosecution material to the media. This sets out the type of prosecution material that will normally be released, or considered for release, together with the factors we will take into account when considering requests. Publicity and the Criminal Justice System protocol

E-commerce law update includes ISP hate speech exemption: “

Dispensation granted for ‘mere conduits’

The Government has published Regulations that will absolve internet service providers (ISPs) and other digital service providers of responsibility for religion or sexuality-related hate speech transmitted over their networks.…

“

(Via The Register – Public Sector.)

UK.gov moves to block Hamas kids site: “

Incites hatred, says MP

The Home Office is considering blocking a childrens’ website run by the Palestinian group Hamas following suggestions it incites hatred of Jews.…

“

(Via The Register – Public Sector.)

Yaman Akdeniz, Racism on the Internet, Council of Europe Publishing, 2010 (ISBN 978-92-871-6634-0) is now available.

Racism was a pressing social problem long before the emergence of the digital age. The advancement of digital communication technologies such as the Internet has, however, added a new dimension to this problem by providing individuals and organisations with modern and powerful means to propagate racism and xenophobia. The use of the Internet as an instrument for the widespread dissemination of racist content is assessed in detail by Yaman Akdeniz.

The problem of racist content on the Internet has naturally prompted vigorous responses from a variety of agents, including governments, supranational and international organisations and from the private sector. This book also provides a detailed critical overview of these regulatory and non-regulatory initiatives.

Fourth Law and Information Society Symposium: Hate Versus Democracy on the Internet

Date: Friday, 26 March, 2010
Time: 9:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.
Location: Pope Auditorium, Fordham Law School, New York.
Sponsor: Center on Law & Information Policy

From political blogs to the exposure of rights abuses, the Internet advances communication and the free flow of information that is at the heart of democracy. Yet, from Holocaust deniers to terrorist organizers, the Internet also serves as an enabler for extremists promoting hate, violence and the corrosion of democratic values. This conference will explore the legal and policy dimensions of the Internet’s dual impact.

8:30 – 9:00 Registration and Breakfast

9:00 – 9:15 Welcome

9:15 – 10:45

Panel 1: The Internet as a Dual Use Technology: Democracy and Extremism

This panel will examine the Internet’s dual impact on democracy and extremism. Panel members will explore how social networks, blogs and websites have been used simultaneously to spread democracy and promote hate. They will discuss the tensions that arise on the Internet between these competing interests.

Moderator: Zephyr Teachout, Associate Professor of Law, Fordham Law School

Panelists:
• Bruce Etling, Director of the Internet & Democracy Project, Berkman Center for Internet and Society, Harvard University
• Holly Hawkins, Director of Consumer Advocacy and Privacy, AOL
• Alexander Tsesis, Assistant Professor of Law, Loyola University School of Law
• Mark Weitzman, Director of Task Force on Hate & Terrorism, Simon Wiesenthal Center

10:45 – 11:00 Break

11:00 – 12:30

Panel 2: Distinguishing Hate Speech from Legitimate Political Expression

This panel will explore how we distinguish hate speech from legitimate political expression and whether such a line can be drawn. Panel members will consider what characteristics make hate speech dangerous and different from democratic political debate. The panel will consider specific examples of online “hate sites” and other ways that the Internet has been used to spread extremist thought.

Moderator: Ann Bartow, Professor of Law, University of South Carolina School of Law

Panelists:
• David E. Bernstein, Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law
• Steven J. Heyman, Professor of Law, Chicago-Kent College of Law
• Kenneth Lasson, Professor of Law, University of Baltimore School of Law
• Nicole Wong, Vice President & Deputy General Counsel, Google, Inc.

12:30 – 2:00 Lunch and Keynote Address
Jing Zhao (aka Michael Anti)
Political Columnist and Blogger
Harvard Nieman Fellow

2:00 – 3:30

Panel 3: Online Hate Speech and Diverse International Concerns

This panel will explore the competing cultural concerns about hate speech that make international regulation challenging. Panel members will consider how the definition of hate speech and norms about regulation differ internationally.

Moderator: Julie Suk, Associate Professor of Law, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law

Panelists:
• Raphael Cohen-Almagor, Professor, Chair in Politics, University of Hull
• Sandra Coliver, Senior Legal Officer, Open Society Justice Initiative
• Peter Molnar, Senior Research Fellow, Center for Media and Communications Studies, Central European University
• Philippe A. Schmidt, Managing Partner, SBKG & Associates and Chairman of the International Network Against Cyber Hate

3:30 – 3:45 Break

3:45 – 5:15

Panel 4: How to Combat Hate Speech While Promoting Democracy

This panel will explore various ways that we can combat or prevent hate speech online while still allowing robust democratic expression. Panel members will consider regulatory and non-regulatory options and will discuss which methods best serve the dual goals of promoting democracy and tolerance.

Moderator: Joel R. Reidenberg, Professor of Law and Academic Director of the Center on Law & Information Policy, Fordham Law School

Panelists:
• Yaman Akdeniz, Associate Professor, Human Rights Law Research Center, Istanbul Bilgi University & Director, Cyber-Rights.Org
• Susan Benesch, Senior Fellow, World Policy Institute
• Danielle Citron, Professor of Law, University of Maryland School of Law
• Philippe Dufresne, Director & Senior Counsel, Canadian Human Rights Commission

The conference is free and open to the public. 6 Non-Transitional, Professional Practice NYS CLE Credits are available for $90 ($50 for Fordham Law alumni & public interest attorneys). If you desire CLE credit please register online and complete and submit a copy of the PDF registration form provided below as instructed.

Fordham Law School has a financial hardship policy for the conference. For additional information please visit: http://law.fordham.edu/cle.

BBC News – Internet racism pair lose appeal

The men were jailed after a failed bid to seek asylum in the US

Two men have lost their appeals against the UK’s first conviction for inciting racial hatred via a foreign website.

Simon Sheppard, 51, was sentenced to four years and 10 months, and Stephen Whittle, 42, to two years and four months at Leeds Crown Court in July.

However, the Court of Appeal has reduced Sheppard’s sentence by one year and Whittle’s jail term by six months.

Sheppard, from Selby, North Yorks, and Whittle, of Preston, Lancs, controlled US websites featuring racist material.

During their first trial in 2008, they skipped bail and fled to California, where they sought asylum claiming they were being persecuted for their right-wing views, but were deported.

The police investigation began after a complaint about a leaflet called ‘Tales of the Holohoax’, which was pushed through the door of a Blackpool synagogue and traced back to a post office box in Hull registered to Sheppard.

‘Abusive and insulting’

Published material found later included images of murdered Jews alongside cartoons and articles ridiculing ethnic groups.

The pair were charged under the Public Order Act with publishing racially inflammatory material, distributing racially inflammatory material and possessing racially inflammatory material with a view to distribution.

Sheppard, of Brook Street, Selby, was found guilty of 16 offences and Whittle, of Avenham Lane, Preston, was found guilty of five.

Sentencing them, Judge Rodney Grant said he had rarely seen material which was so abusive and insulting.

Sheppard’s counsel Adrian Davies told the Appeal Court the sites were ‘entirely lawful’ in the US.

He said that there was no evidence that anyone in England and Wales – except for the police officer in the case – had ever seen any of them.

E-commerce Regulations updated to exempt ISPs from hate speech charges: “The Government has published Regulations that will absolve internet service providers (ISPs) and other digital service providers of responsibility for religion or sexuality-related hate speech transmitted over their networks.”

(Via OUT-LAW News.)

UK – Boxer threatens Facebook with legal action(Guardian)
The WBA light welterweight champion Amir Khan and his promoter, Frank Warren, are squaring up to the social networking site Facebook in a legal battle that could have far-reaching consequences. The pair have engaged lawyers to threaten the US internet company with action over the use of images and names alongside material they consider to be defamatory and racist. Stephen Taylor Heath, head of sports and media at Lupton Fawcett, said that a cursory search of Facebook quickly led to ‘bogus’ pages that used the images and names of the pair to link to material that would be ‘highly defamatory’ if published in a newspaper or magazine. Warren, who has fought several high-profile legal battles, is understood to be determined to force Facebook to change its policy and take responsibility for the more unsavoury opinions of its registered users. There is a legal grey area about the extent to which the operator of a website, or the provider of community tools, can be held liable for comments posted.

(Via QuickLinks Update.)