In the wake of discussions here on QZ concerning moderation... link
(from the article)
"Seven top European Union judges ruled Thursday that a leading Internet news website is legally responsible for offensive views posted by readers in the site's comments section.
The European Court of Human Rights found that Estonian courts were within their rights to fine Delfi, one of the country's largest news websites, for comments made anonymously about a news article, according to a judgment."
^ there's always a disclaimer that any views shared on a site are not necessarily the views of the site itself, but when said views are deliberately offensive or abusive, then moderation SHOULD come in. If the website wasn't doing this, I think it's correct that such court judgement is made. Some comments just go way beyond "freedom of speech".
thomasquinn 32989 wrote:
In the wake of discussions here on QZ concerning moderation...
link
(from the article)
"Seven top European Union judges ruled Thursday that a leading Internet news website is legally responsible for offensive views posted by readers in the site's comments section.
The European Court of Human Rights found that Estonian courts were within their rights to fine Delfi, one of the country's largest news websites, for comments made anonymously about a news article, according to a judgment."
If the $439 fine is for threatening comments, then the fine is too low. However if the $439 fine is just for offensive comments then the fine is too high, and political correctness has run amok.
I can understand the reasoning. The news sites are hoping to be profit making entities, and they potentially benefit financially from the entertainment value of anonymous people commenting on a story. And if the story is about a company or a person, then slander laws would apply if there is anything untrue printed. So, because the comments appear to be connected to the article, or at least hosted by the news site, it would seem to make the news site liable (the responsible party), especially when there is nobody else to go after (the comments being anonymous). So, the news sites may have to start pre-approving diverse comments (as they would do for an editorial section), stop allowing anonymous comments, or stop allowing comments altogether. This does not stop free speech, because a person can still go on Twitter or Facebook and spout off; it's just that they wouldn't be "connected" to the news site, and the built-in larger audience.
How it compares to the situation at Queenzone? Well, I should think that slanderous comments about real people here would be a potential cause of liability for the owner of Queenzone. Examples: anonymous fan says something untrue (and hurtful) about one of the members of the band or management of the band, or about a person (another fan or collector), who has been named here (their real name given), and such untrue comments were damaging to that person's personal or professional reputation.
But I think because Queenzone is not widely read, probably nobody would be interested in such a law suit. It might depend on other factors, though, so who knows? If I owned this site, I might consider moderation, just to be taking "reasonable" action to prevent potential problems. But, I think a person could always claim that there is often a humorous standard on Queenzone, and therefore many comments are interpreted as jokes.
Donna13 wrote:
But I think because Queenzone is not widely read, probably nobody would be interested in such a law suit. It might depend on other factors, though, so who knows?
Don't suppose you recall the woman whose image was used very misleadingly by a troll years ago (I believe Arlene was the username?), who wrote openly on this board sometime in the last two years to request her image taken down due to the defamatory nature of the image's use. And pretty sure she had zero connection otherwise to the Queen fandom.
Yes, I do remember - vaguely - someone asking that their picture be removed. Was it removed?
I think this sort of personally sensitive issue has been handled by YV and Richard in the past. We are not completely without moderation / admin assistance here.