MPs of both major parties are accomplices to this toxic, asinine, stupid legislation

[p.dath]

We have a new act of parliament today. The "Harmful Digital Communications Bill". I think this bill is worded far too widely, and is dangerous.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/...resel_25_a&p=1

Make sure when communicating with other people on a forum you don't take any of these actions:

Principle 1
A digital communication should not disclose sensitive personal facts about an individual.
Principle 2
A digital communication should not be threatening, intimidating, or menacing.
Principle 3
A digital communication should not be grossly offensive to a reasonable person in the position of the affected individual.
Principle 4
A digital communication should not be indecent or obscene.
Principle 5
A digital communication should not be used to harass an individual.
Principle 6
A digital communication should not make a false allegation.
Principle 7
A digital communication should not contain a matter that is published in breach of confidence.
Principle 8
A digital communication should not incite or encourage anyone to send a message to an individual for the purpose of causing harm to the individual.
Principle 9
A digital communication should not incite or encourage anotheran individual to commit suicide.
Principle 10
A digital communication should not denigrate an individual by reason of his or her colour, race, ethnic or national origins, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability.

[Scuba_Steve]

[bogan]

Principle 1
A digital communication should not disclose sensitive personal facts about an individual.
Principle 2
A digital communication should not be threatening, intimidating, or menacing.
Principle 3
A digital communication should not be grossly offensive to a reasonable person in the position of the affected individual.
Principle 4
A digital communication should not be indecent or obscene.
Principle 5
A digital communication should not be used to harass an individual.
Principle 6
A digital communication should not make a false allegation.

RIP kiwibiker

[Akzle]

fucken jews.

[mashman]

Well that's one way of procuring more funding the gcsb/sis so that they can monitor everyone's email.

[Gremlin]

Well at least you could say stuff to people in real life .... for now

Have heard of kids complaining of being bullied at school... the other kid said I don't want to be friends...

[tigertim20]

RIP kiwibiker

beat me to it!

[mossy1200]

Wonder if my bike still runs.

[TheDemonLord]

The saddest part about this bill, will be the fact that it will only ever be applied AFTER something tragic has happened.

[Akzle]

The saddest part about this bill, will be the fact that it will only ever be applied AFTER something tragic has happened.

youre right, ban internet.

[RDJ]

Read it and weep - freedom, coffin, another nail courtesy of our elected representatives.

Kiwi parliament passes 'Harmful digital communications bill' outlawing online nasties

1 Jul 2015 at 03:57, Richard Chirgwin

New Zealand has become the latest country to think bad online manners are amenable to legislation.

The country last night passed a controversial bill, the Harmful Digital Communications Bill, in the hope of stemming “cyber-bullying”.

The bill creates a regime under which digital communications causing “serious emotional distress” are subject to an escalating regime that starts as “negotiation, mediation or persuasion” but reaches up to creating the offences of not complying with an order, and “causing harm by posting digital communication”.

The most serious offenders would face two years in jail or a maximum fine of NZ$50,000 (US$33,900).

After it passed by a 116-to-5 vote in New Zealand's parliament, Gareth Hughes, one of the four Greens MPs to vote against the bill, said it was overly broad and “risks limiting our freedom of expression”.

NZ Labour said it was “wedged” by the NZ government: while some of the bill was “worthy of discussion” the law has “deeply worrying” elements.

The bill covers posts that are racist, sexist, or show religious intolerance, along with hassling people over disability or sexual orientation.

There's also a new offence of incitement to suicide (three years' jail).

The regime will be enforced by a yet-to-be-established agency that will make contact with publishers and social media platforms, and if it can't resolve a complaint, the agency will be able to escalate it to the district court.

There's a safe harbour provision for Web sites, and here's where the free speech arises. A platform like Facebook or Twitter (if they bothered) can opt into the safe harbour – but only if they agree to remove allegedly offending material either on-demand or within the bill's 48-hour grace period.

New Zealand's National Business Review notes complaints that it could criminalise children over the age of 14.

InternetNZ told the outlet that the bill should be kept under review: “the risk is of unintended consequences, or chosen balances of rights not working out in practice.” ®

[mashman]

Repost police here... but yours has a better title

[bogan]

The saddest part about this bill, will be the fact that it will only ever be applied AFTER something tragic has happened.

But perhaps it could provide a stronger template for internet moderation in the first place.

With all the hassle of tracking down internet anonymity etc, I think the application of it after something tragic has happened is the correct way to go, otherwise you end up either coming down way too hard on just few people to make examples of, or 'spot fines' all over the show which can't cover the cost of prosecution.

[Hitcher]

More worrying is the creation of an agency to oversee and enforce this nonsense. That will come at some cost for us poor, long-suffering taxpayers. I think that governments should have greater things to worry about than this.

Will this reduce New Zealand's annual (reported) suicide rate, which is currently running close to two people each day?

[Banditbandit]

[B][I]

The bill covers posts that are racist, sexist, or show religious intolerance, along with hassling people over disability or sexual orientation.

So we can't tell Honda riders they are gay any more?