• The forum software that supports hummy.tv has been upgraded to XenForo 2.3!

    Please bear with us as we continue to tweak things, and feel free to post any questions, issues or suggestions in the upgrade thread.

Interesting Items...

Sound too much like Dick Turpin to me. Or Robbin Hood. At least the latter was purported to 'do the right thing' even if he never actually existed.
 
Trev said:
  1. Sound too much like Dick Turpin to me.
  2. Or Robbin Hood. At least the latter was purported to 'do the right thing' even if he never actually existed.
Click to expand...
  1. Robbing the rich to give to himself.
  2. Robbing the rich to give to the poor.
All we need now is somebody robbing the poor to give to the rich. Anybody?
 
481454-facebook-reactions.jpg

PCMag UK | News

Man Fined $4K for 'Liking' Facebook Comments
BY MATTHEW HUMPHRIES 1 JUN 2017, 12:45 P.M.
Read very carefully before hitting the Like button on Facebook, it could land you in court.

Reacting to content on Facebook can be achieved by commenting, sharing, or probably the most popular method: hitting that Like button. However, a court in Switzerland just convicted a man on defamation claims simply for "Liking" libelous comments posted on the social network.

The comments posted on Facebook referred to an animal rights activist who was accused of "antisemitism, racism and fascism." To be clear, the man in court did not write these comments, he simply hit the Like button for them. These Likes were made between July and September 2015. That's before Facebook expanded the Like button to include several other reactions.

According to CNN, the court in Zurich decided to convict the man on several counts of defamation for hitting the Like button. The reason given was his clicking of the Like button constituted "indirectly endorsing" the comments. But further to that, the court also recognized the act of liking the comments as "further distribution" of them. A statement made by the court said, "The defendant clearly endorsed the unseemly content and made it his own."

Although the defendant has the right to appeal, his punishment for being found guilty amounts to a $4,100 fine. As for Facebook, they are declining to comment on the court case beyond stating the social network sees "no direct link" to the company.

Regardless of what comments were made on Facebook, should the act of hitting the Like button result in a lawsuit? What's more clear is, if the comments are libelous, then the person who wrote them can be pursued for prosecution.

However you feel about this court case, it's important to keep in mind such action can be taken against an individual. Does the expansion of the Like button to include several types of reaction to a comment make the situation better or worse? I guess we won't know that until another Facebook Like button lawsuit happens
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It annoys the hell out of me. How many more victims in the Archbishop Keogh abuse case were missed by this silliness?
 
Trev said:
Why do most everybody incorrectly assume that everybody else is 'on' facebook and/or twitter etc.?
Click to expand...
They are a means of communication, whether you choose to receive information that way or not. The same equally applies to all opt-in forms of communication, including the Internet in general, newspapers, TV, radio... The only universal form I can think of, other than going to look at information posted at the offices personally, and that is not opt-in, is the post.

Facebook (and Twitter etc) makes it easy for information providers to distribute their information, and for interested parties to subscribe to those news feeds and be alerted to updates in real time, and the provider doesn't have the overhead of managing email distribution lists or whatever. Use it or not as you like, but if you have the capacity yet don't avail yourself of the benefits you have no cause for complaint.

The section of the population unfamiliar with Internet things (specifically the elderly, but they're catching up) that may be unreadable by these methods are not missing out as such, because the live updating is not something they would have been used to anyway.

Time will come that instead of legal announcements having to appear in The Times, they will have an Internet channel such as Facebook (or some service specifically for the task).
 
Last edited:
Are they assuming, or are they saying "if you would like live updates about our service please connect to our information channel"?

(I took your comment as a reaction to the one about bus services)
 
I agree with Trev, what is wrong with a web page, available to EVERYONE on the web? Pushing information through proprietary channels is not on. How would you feel about important information only available if you have an iThing? Say BA only announce their information via an iTunes only app? Or via M$ Edge?

Facebook web pages are lazy, incomplete and only accessible via a Facebook account, and many of us have reasons for not wanting one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top