Bloggers Rights Campaign updates and links

by Jesus Wed Jun 13, 2007 19:37

.

Google it

by Stuart Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:51

In the Wall Street Journal today Andrew Lavelle reports that ReputationDefender is no longer "taking the risk" of pursuing targets who stand up to them - so they are presumably now just threatening people they expect to be able to intimidate.

While Mr. Fertik said such problems are rare, takedown attempts that go awry can generate considerable unwanted attention. Stuart Neilson, a statistics instructor at a university in Cork, Ireland, claimed on his personal Web site that he was the victim of "academic bullying" by a colleague. After the other professor hired ReputationDefender to try to have the accusations removed, Dr. Neilson rebuffed the firm and posted his exchanges with the company on his site. Those posts received wider attention when they were republished on a blog devoted to faculty discord in academia. "It has merely generated additional publicity," he said.

ReputationDefender also sent a takedown request to Consumerist, a Gawker Media blog that had written about a man who was briefly jailed for harassment after repeatedly calling online travel agent Priceline.com Inc. for a refund. The letter asked the blog to remove or alter the archived post, saying it was "outdated and disturbing" to its client. Consumerist editor Ben Popken blasted the request with a profanely titled entry, calling it an attempt at censorship. "It's not like we're spreading libel," he said. "They were trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube."

ReputationDefender's Mr. Fertik said the company is no longer sending letters to irreverent blogs like Consumerist, which may be more likely to mock the company's efforts. "We are no longer taking those kinds of risks with those kinds of outlets," he said.

The exchanges with ReputationDefender, acting for Professor Ivan Perry of University College Cork, are posted at http://www.geocities.com/stuartdneilson/

by C Murray Wed Apr 11, 2007 20:24

On April 24th 2007 the European Parliament is voting on a directive IPREDC:-
Second Intellectual Property enforcement Directive.

The eff have a petition and info on:-

http://www.eff.org

http://www.copycrime.eu

its under the heading "Don't let Europe turn its citizens into copy criminals"
at the website http://www.eff.org

by C. Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:42

Globalisation in telly-

http://www.eff.org/IP/DVB/dvb_briefing_paper.php

http://www.eff.org/IP/DVB/dvb_critique.php

etc-
Microsoft:-

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/005146.php

Mostly US policy which is being used to develop EU policy in copywrites/patents

by C Murray Fri Mar 09, 2007 20:03

This site was circulated on Women's Day and has excellent info on media
campaign in ICT and Radio:-

'Radio Capacity Building'.
'ICT Capacity Building'.

Are in the left hand column of the site.

The info on free speech and women community communication is at link:-

http://www.isiswomen.org

http://www.isiswomen.org/index.php?option=com_content&t...d=204

The second link is to the Isiswomen 2007 statement on ending Impunity for
Violence against Women 2007. [International Women's day Campaign]

The site is long established and full of wonderful info and contains also
a clip art section.

Manila Project

isis women 2006

by Stuart Fri Mar 09, 2007 12:54

Digital Rights have a very good online pamphlet on Libel Laws in Ireland as they relate to online content (http://www.digitalrights.ie/2006/01/06/libel-laws-in-ir...land/). It states that Internet Service Providers will, and are probably legally best advised to, delete any content that anyone ever complains about. Once brought to their attention they become responsible. Arbitrating truth is recklessly expensive for them.

So an Acceptable Usage Policy clause stating "Customers may not use IOL's services to create, host or transmit material which is designed to cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to others" means that IoL will delete material that anyone complains about, without reference to the substance or validity of the complaint. (All ISPs have similar clauses, so this is not intended as an attack on my ISP).

It would seem that any comment on a political party, representative, planning matter or impropriety of any kind is bound to annoy or inconvenience, and can be removed from servers within Ireland very easily.

by Stuart Fri Mar 09, 2007 11:56

Have many online writers and bloggers received attention from ReputationDefender that might be considered harassment? I have received a number of requests for the removal of material that I have posted, and they have also contacted other people who have either commented on or merely linked to my site requesting removal.

Their own FAQ is committed to freedom of speech - "Our correction/removal ("Destroy") service was designed to help private citizens regain control over unintentionally posted or outdated personal information accidentally disclosed to the public Internet, and address potentially libelous, slanderous, defamatory or invasive information about them that serves no public benefit" - but their actions appear to be to stifle it.

For anyone interested in seeing the approach they took when trying to remove information about Professor Ivan Perry, I have posted the full email exchange at the link below.