Now I thought the provisions in the bill addressing online hate were a good thing – where as imposing restrictions on encrypted communications on ordinary citizens, so reducing their security, in order to catch criminals, are not. But this is not an open and shut case for me – I continue to examine the issues – as should you – before supporting or condemning the bill.
Here is a discussion by Laura Higson-Bliss of Keele University, where she lectures in law:
Reading the article there appears to be laws, that already cover the “harmful communications” sections of the new bill. The government acknowledges the existence of the existing laws but is trying to address the issue that the thresholds and interpretation of these laws is too high. There are examples in the article:
An ordinary citizen was fined for offensive drawings on a photo of policemen – go read it – but a footballer in the public eye was not fined for homophobic comments about Tom Daley (also famous). Then there are the times that the law fails to recognise the threat of rape.
There are several conclusions in the article but one I support completely is that for effective online safety it has to be based more on education and community respect and responsibility than simply trying to frame a law that has to be interpreted.
Clive Catton MSc (Cyber Security) – by-line and other articles
Further Reading
The problems with the UK Government’s Online Safety Bill are never ending – Smart Thinking Solutions
Online Safety Bill articles (Smart Thinking Solutions)
Online Safety Bill publications – Parliamentary Bills – UK Parliament
Draft Online Safety Bill (Joint Committee) – Summary – Committees – UK Parliament
Draft Online Safety Bill – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
Smart Thinking Solutions supports this UK Government initiative:
Let’s stop abuse together – Stop Abuse Together (campaign.gov.uk)
