This is yet another example of people trying to apply laws that would've worked before we had the internet and now we have it don't work at all. In effect pretty much everyone on the planet can now tell their story to the world and there's pretty much no way of controlling that. It's a similar situation to the RIAA and all that ilk. The courts need to recognise that the world has changed and need to change with it. I think we're seeing some of this change already but there is still some basic lack of understanding between there.
Heh, the Scottish Sunday Herald are doing their bit http://twitpic.com/50z730 http://twitpic.com/50zmkm Giggs really is an idiot for thinking that suing Twitter and Imogen was a good idea. Edit: Ugh, if this is true: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1389562/TV-star-face-jail-tweets.html Then it's a disgrace. Now Giggs is trying to get a UK writer jailed for outing his affair? Words fail me.
lol I hereby rename this thread Operation: Paralypsis. I don't get how people still think one lousey court injunction will stop something on the Internet... it's madness.
I don'g get how one court secret injuction about an anonymous person will stop reaching something any Internet service (Facebook, Twitter, forums,...).
In the UK we like to dress up in ridiculous costumes and generally the more important you are the more ridiculous your clothes are
He hasn't just wasted his time trying to pursue legal action - he's actively made things much, much worse. By kicking up a legal fuss he's ensured that about a million more people will see it than otherwise would have (me and all of us here, for starters). Good job, Giggs!
This just about sums it up for me But in all seriousness I think that he really did make it much worse by trying to sue Twitter, just made more people interested in the case and more likely for his secret to be ousted.
Might be that the laws where the server resides applies. At least seemed to be that way with piratebay until their countriy's laws got "changed". Their ability to tell lawyers to shove it in various ways is pretty interesting.
Again politicians and lawyers making decisions in a new world they don't understand trying to make outdated ideas fit into a frame work that is fundamentally different to the one they imagine the country should be. At this point I can't really have a go at Giggs as he is probably taking advice from lawyers and others and on an issue such as this, (no offense to him) he probably doesn't understand the consequences. He did what he thought was best but unfortunately he got bad advice as I'm sure any savvy PR person would have told him that this stuff always gets out and its best to let it blow over otherwise you just create a far larger story. This has gone from what would have been 2-3 days of media print to weeks of intrigue etc.
Ageing footballer has an affair with reality tv star? So what? It would have in and out the papers in a day, or a week if he was up to something particularly kinky and no one would have cared. It's become so common with footballers its now a cliche. Instead he turns it into a **** storm over freedom of speech. What an idiot. Your not that important Gigs no matter what your ego tells you.
Tragically it will never work any other way. Can you imagine a legal system based on the premise that everything is available online 24/7. Jesus it'd be like handing Gaddafi nuclear weapons... But he's a footballer and a very important Welshman, what don't you understand! His privacy has to be protected... I think the PM's standing in over these things now.
The main issue is that there is such thing as gagging injuction, especially if we talk about anynomous injuctions. It's like saying - Hey newspapers, there is a new injuction where you can't say that anonymous had an afair with anonymous, and if you break this injuction then you go to jail.
Agreed, the idea that these footballers (Alan Shearer now too) can censor the British press or freedom of discussion is disgusting. I actually did give a few seconds of thought to writing the above name, because it may well be not allowed. That's all round pretty disgusting that these people think they have a right to censor the entire nation just because they've stuck their wang's in someone skanky and don't want the world to know about it. Thankfully the internet is doing what it does best, works around censorship as a network failure, nothing more. There is no way that super-injunctions can work out well for the people taking them out, because of the I Am Spartacus effect, and then also Streisand effect.
