Skip to content or view screen version

Terrorism Act 2006 - Takedown notices, website owners beware!

Anne Ark-Key | 14.04.2006 14:38 | Indymedia | Repression | Technology | Terror War

The newly introduced Terrorism Act 2006 has some alarming clauses relating to websites - particularly likely to affect sites where members of the public can contribute content. Unwary bloggers, forum owners and even Indymedia staff could find themselves held liable (with maximum 7-year sentence) for unwitting "endorsement" of materials deemed to be terrorist in nature.

Organisations that provide web sites or other opportunities for individuals to publish on the Internet should be aware of a new notice-and-take-down requirement contained within the Terrorism Act 2006, which came into force yesterday, and ensure that they have procedures to handle any notices served on them under the Act.

Sections 3 and 4 of the Act enable a police constable to give written notice to an organisation that a particular statement they publish electronically is unlawful, because it relates to terrorism. If the organisation does not remove or amend the statement within two working days (only Saturdays, Sundays, Bank Holidays, Christmas Day and Good Friday are excluded) then it will be considered to have endorsed the statement and thereafter be liable to prosecution for encouraging terrorism or disseminating terrorist publications.

An organisation served with a notice is also required to take all reasonable steps to prevent future re-publication of the same or similar statements. Since the law is brand new, it is not clear how "all reasonable steps" will be interpreted, but it seems likely to require at least an investigation into who published the statement and removing that person's ability to publish in future.

The Act can be found at:
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/20060011.htm

The relevant part of the Act is at:
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/60011--b.htm#3

Parliamentary debate from February relating to this section of the Act:
 http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2006-02-15a.1471.2

Anne Ark-Key

Comments

Hide the following 6 comments

Dark dark days

14.04.2006 16:08

What a world is emerging around us, scary times.
It would be a good thing if/when somebody blows up parliament.




guy


Not terrorism

14.04.2006 16:58

Hey guy, that's not glorifying terrorism. To really be terrorism it has to be an act of violence or threatened violence against civilian targets with the intent of lobbying the people or the authorities to change something.
Blowing up parliament or assassinating politicians probably isn't terrorism, it's just direct action ;-)

Ultimately these draconian laws, aimed at oppressing the people and fortifying those already with power, will see an explosion of political violence from the grassroots which has nothing left to loose and nothing left to fear, and everything to gain.

Those in power know it's coming.

harry


A selection of terrorists

14.04.2006 17:00

according to various officials/agencies of our boss (sorry, 'partner') the US, reclaim the streets, the anarchist federation and 'carnival against capital' are *terrorist organisations*. And the Carnival Against Capital was a fucking *event*! Another weapon for them, another reason for us. The difference between a liberal state and a totalitarian state is the strength of the organised working class, nothing else will stom 'em.

(A)


Like an eclipse- except the Sun isn't coming back

15.04.2006 00:58

Blair isn't interested in prosecutions, and any high profile court cases will tend to involve state agents POSING as activists anyway. Blair IS interested in self-censorship and fear.

For instance, you WILL NOT see any actions taken against sites or individuals glorifying terrorism by the UK, US or another nation whose name I won't mention to minimise the excuses used to hide my comments. So, all those right and ultra-right locations will continue their flood of "butcher every muslim under every excuse" articles and comments. Meanwhile, those sites that are supposedly anti-war will have an excuse to scrub clean the TINY number of posts that strongly push the opposite position.

Cause and effect... Blair controls the Mass Media totally. The internet is 95% right or far-right in political comment (rightwing sites permit almost all right wing comment, so-called left wing sites tend to censor left-wing comment to ensure it is so harmless as to be pointless). Blair is after the 5% of the net that is, even if in name only, against him and his war plans.

You will notice that this so-called law allows (essential in a police state) that the police actually become judges in the strict sense of the meaning of the word. Like ASBO's (whose existence serves a purpose few of you understand), this so-called law revolves around the concept of a threat of a threat, and as such is designed to undermine fatally the concept of law that has existed in the UK since the Magna Carta and before.

When one of Blair's uniformed thugs threatens, the threat is free from any test, legal remedy, or appeal. Why? Because of the trick that states the threat THREATENS the threat of court action. It is like the mechanism of plea bargaining that has fatally corrupted the US legal system. Every day, innocent people WILLINGLY go to prison in the States, to serve a tiny proportion of an artificially inflated MAXIMUM sentence created for the very purpose of ensuring that outcome.

Blair wants us to KNOW why our trips around the Net show anti-Blair comment scrubbed clean of all edge or effectiveness. Blair wants every muslim to feel the same despair as European jews on the edge of WW2.

Today, in seconds, a muslim can read THOUSANDS of comments demanding the murder of civilian workers in the Iran nuclear industry. They can read thousands of comments cheering the murder of kiddies in that territory next to that 'nation' I can't mention, claiming that every palestinian child is a future terrorist. They can read the foulest of racist anti-muslim comment in every online UK paper from The Guardian to The Telegraph. At the same time, they KNOW that if they do ANYTHING to protest or comment, Blair's uniformed (or plain-clothed) thugs will be smashing their doors down at 5am in the morning, and that they will disappear for months if not years.

To commit genocide, Blair MUST walk down the same path as each previous genocidal monster in Human history. As he does so, he MUST trip thousands of 'red flags' that first alert those that remember the lessons of history, and lastly alert even the most dim-witted. The ruthless destruction of balance in 'political' comment is one such flag, but this act helps reduce the speed at which other flags become apparent to the majority.

Self-censorship at a time like this is DEATH. Blair, however, knows that he must risk creating even as he destroys. The creation I refer to is the creation of GREATER Human creativity itself. Blair's agents on sites such as this DEMAND moderation when refering to Blair and the rest of his war-criminal allies. "B-L-I-A-R is a term specifically created by Blair's own psy-ops people because of this reason...

WHEN YOU ARE THE VICTIM OF A BULLY, EMULATING THE TACTICS OF THE BULLY, LIKE PATHETIC NAME-CALLING, HAS ***ZERO*** EFFECT.

BLAIR wants you to call him Bliar. Blair does not want you to call him a MASS-MURDERING SADISTIC WAR-CRIMINAL RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAME CRIMES THAT THE NAZIS WERE FOUND GUILTY OF AT NUREMBERG.

Who is it that delights in calling Blair "Bliar" but chokes on the word WAR-CRIMINAL. Who is it that equates the death of UK and US murderers in Iraq with Iraq civilians and defenders? Who is it that talks about Blair making 'mistakes' and being a 'puppet'. 95% of the political Net, and all the Mass Media is already on Blair's side. Blair's massive 'security' budget is spent where it does the most good, and for the most part that is in the 5% of the political Net that is left (in both meanings).

The Human creativity I refered to above is in discovering EXACTLY what kinds of words and ideas REALLY hurt Blair and his allies, and making sure that these words are said as frequently, and as loudly as possible.

-Blair wants you to VOTE, because the system now CANNOT remove Blair, but if the percentage of participation falls too low, the vote loses all legitimacy in the eyes of the world, and that is ALL Blair cares about at this stage.

-Blair wants you to call him a geek, freak, liar, dork, puppet, or any other of a thousand useless pathetic playground insults.

-Blair wants you to accept you favorite left-wing sites being magically scrubbed clean of so many valid subjects (including that nation I can't mention), while hosting an ever greater amount of things like Blair friendly attacks on each and every aspect of Iran.

-Blair wants you to self-censor, and in doing so despise the people who refuse to do the same (because those people make you feel your cowardice, and from shame all to often flows misdirected anger)

-Blair wants you to feel that the future he has planned for you is so evil that you do like that guy at the end of Brazil, and enter your own little insane happy la-la land (you know, the one where Blair is gone by Xmas just like The Sun and The Guardian tell you).

-Blair wants you to feel that justice for him at worst is a nice retirement in one of Berlusconi's mansions.

-Blair wants you to draw NO conclusions about the impossibility of people staying within the New Reich party WITHOUT giving full support to Blair and his enterprises.

Words can and do hurt Blair. Enough words would destroy him, if spoken to enough people. This is why I, and people like me, are screamed down in places like this, when we are intelligent enough to put across a powerful message, while bypassing the growing number of excuses used to censor us (hey, how about a rule banning messages containing any words all-in-capitals, or comments more than 10 lines long, or posters that refuse to be drawn into arguments by New Reich trolls, or articles that say bad things about Blair- whoops, that last one would make things TOO obvious).

twilight


More on Takedown Notices under Section 3 of the Terrorism Act 200

15.04.2006 10:21

Yeah, the two day compliance clause is pretty off the wall... very little chance to verify if it's a genuine notice or not for example... for more see:
 http://www.spy.org.uk/spyblog/2006/04/lawyerbots_and_takedown_notice.html

Another problem with the legislation is that providing training material in the use of noxious substances - for example all the Health and Safety information which companies and institutions are legally obliged to make available under the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health regulationsl - could carry a penalty of up to 10 years in prison!

more


Kill Tony Blair

15.04.2006 10:27

I will throw a party for anyone who kills Tony Blair. It is our clear duty under Nuremberg laws to oppose our genocidal regime with violence. I would kill him myself if I could. I would welcome prosecution so I could show yet again the refusal of Blairs judges to recognise international law. If I was on a jury I would refuse to convict any political assassin.

And the judges and sheriffs and lords and bailiffs, kill them too. They are worse than nazis.

Uphold the law - kill a tyrant today and you will be glorified.

Danny