Internet Trolling...should it be a criminal offence

[Vagrant0]

What do you want? The ability to just call up the ISP and demand all the personal information of someone without requiring a court order? Kay, now that stalker that you hate so much can have easy access to all of your personal information. While you're cutting through red tape to have the police/courts do something, they are hiding in your bushes outside your front window.

Obviously you would be required to provide evidence of wrongdoing in order to get any information from an ISP, or it would have to come from an intermediary, such as a webhost where the incident occurred.

[ginnyfizz]

Yeah sure, get a court order...if you can afford one. Read my previous posts, not that easy when lawyers demand money up front rather than on a contingency basis.

You forgot being able to know who the person was in the first place. Most ISPs don't necessarily keep very good records, retain them for long periods of times, or in the case of mobile providers, the IP is usually shared and aggregated. If a proxy is used, the reliability of getting any useful information depends largely on where that proxy is stationed and what their own policies and logistic capabilities are.

Both of you forget that you can file a john doe lawsuit, then have a court order issued for getting the information you need and that you can file without a lawyer.

 

What do you want? The ability to just call up the ISP and demand all the personal information of someone without requiring a court order? Kay, now that stalker that you hate so much can have easy access to all of your personal information. While you're cutting through red tape to have the police/courts do something, they are hiding in your bushes outside your front window.

 

Misrepresenting me again? Jeepers....

Actually, no, you can't file a John Doe lawsuit, not where I am from. YOU forget that jurisdictions vary as to what procedures are allowed. And whereas you can file here in Britain without a lawyer, practically speaking that would be extremely difficult for most people. The odds are not great for litigants in person, most invariably bottling it when confronted by the hotshot lawyers on the other side. David and Goliath indeed, except the little dude never wins.

 

Can you point out where I said that I wanted the ability to call up an ISP and demand information without a court order? No of course you can't, because I never said that - in the course of your selective quoting you missed the bit where I said that no-one is happy with the amount of info that the Government here is requiring ISP's to hold. And even THEY cannot get it without a court order.

 

I repeat, I have said that the only changes I would like to see would be facilitating access to the law for people who do not have much money. If lawyers would take cases on contingency fee basis for ewxample.

[JimboUK]

 

 

I repeat, I have said that the only changes I would like to see would be facilitating access to the law for people who do not have much money. If lawyers would take cases on contingency fee basis for ewxample.

 

The problem there is a lawyer is not going to want to take on a case when the person on the receiving end has little or no money, like a minor, someone on benefits or on low pay. This law will only really benefit the wealthy who openly abuse the system already in order to silence people.

[Vagrant0]

The problem there is a lawyer is not going to want to take on a case when the person on the receiving end has little or no money, like a minor, someone on benefits or on low pay.

They don't seem to have any problem doing so with cases involving illegal downloads. Not every civil case is such that a good deal of money is being sought. It makes it hard to continue to be an internet troll when it leads to bankruptcy.

[marharth]

Seems like a good idea to bankrupt people for making someone mad online.

 

If it gets past the point of just making someone mad for enjoyment, it is no longer trolling.

Edited August 6, 2012 by marharth

[ginnyfizz]

 

 

I repeat, I have said that the only changes I would like to see would be facilitating access to the law for people who do not have much money. If lawyers would take cases on contingency fee basis for ewxample.

 

The problem there is a lawyer is not going to want to take on a case when the person on the receiving end has little or no money, like a minor, someone on benefits or on low pay. This law will only really benefit the wealthy who openly abuse the system already in order to silence people.

 

 

The problem there is a lawyer is not going to want to take on a case when the person on the receiving end has little or no money, like a minor, someone on benefits or on low pay.

They don't seem to have any problem doing so with cases involving illegal downloads. Not every civil case is such that a good deal of money is being sought. It makes it hard to continue to be an internet troll when it leads to bankruptcy.

 

That's why I am arguing for making it acceptable for cases to be taken on a contingency basis - no money up front, fees out of the damages, which is much more common in the USA and not widely used in the UK. There would still have to be a good chance of winning to make lawyers willing to take a case.

[JimboUK]

The problem there is a lawyer is not going to want to take on a case when the person on the receiving end has little or no money, like a minor, someone on benefits or on low pay.

They don't seem to have any problem doing so with cases involving illegal downloads. Not every civil case is such that a good deal of money is being sought. It makes it hard to continue to be an internet troll when it leads to bankruptcy.

 

Bankrupting the defendant is not going to get the plaintiffs legal bill paid, not that a court would bankrupt someone, they'd ask for some token payment each week if the defendant is on welfare or very low pay, nothing if the defendant is a minor. Either way a lawyer is very unlikely to take on a case against someone who is unable to pay on the basis Ginny suggests. On illegal downloading the history of civil action in this country is full of failures, you have to prove the defendant actually done the downloading, near impossible in a household where there is more than one person with access to the computer and/or the connection used.

[ginnyfizz]

No, I was suggesting cases where the plaintiff was unable to pay. Obviously the troll would have to be worth suing even for a contingency fee based suit. For example I am as broke as can be and have no assets, the people having a go at me, however, did have assets.

 

Marharth, I am talking about cases where it goes far beyond merely making you mad. In cases where the trolls are prepared to totally destroy a persons reputation, that can destroy the victims' livelihood too, the the troll should be prepared to face the consequence of a lawsuit that could result in it coming right back at them, and if that results in bankrupting them...well, tough! Perhaps next time they will make sure their brain is engaged before putting their muckraking little typing fingers into gear.

[kanakosoup]

if you have kids, guide them not to take trolling seriously and just ignore them like what we tell our children to not talk to strangers.

[marharth]

No, I was suggesting cases where the plaintiff was unable to pay. Obviously the troll would have to be worth suing even for a contingency fee based suit. For example I am as broke as can be and have no assets, the people having a go at me, however, did have assets.

 

Marharth, I am talking about cases where it goes far beyond merely making you mad. In cases where the trolls are prepared to totally destroy a persons reputation, that can destroy the victims' livelihood too, the the troll should be prepared to face the consequence of a lawsuit that could result in it coming right back at them, and if that results in bankrupting them...well, tough! Perhaps next time they will make sure their brain is engaged before putting their muckraking little typing fingers into gear.

If someone is working tirelessly to destroy someones reputation they are not a troll in my opinion. That goes farther then just making someone upset for enjoyment. They probably have a different goal, that is likely already illegal under current laws.