Ban ‘suicide chat rooms’

kanu — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 12:34:59 -0400

The father of an 18-year-old, who accessed "suicide chat rooms" on the internet before killing himself, has called for a law to ban them in the UK.

Six years after his son Simon Kelly died, Paul Kelly is still angry that although UK law makes it illegal to offer advice to those contemplating suicide, no-one has actually ever been successfully prosecuted for it. Such sites – of which there are hundreds – are strictly non-interventionist, which angers Mr. Kelly further because he believes someone should have tried to talk his son out of killing himself.

A transcript of Simon’s conversation on the site before killing himself has been released and which reveals that Simon was told by another user to “go out and see the stars.” Simon’s response was, ‘see you on the other side”. Another chat room user wished Simon farewell, while another said “happy bus ride”- the term used by users of such sites to imply committing suicide. Simon’s father belief that the chat room users could have talked his son out of suicide is evidenced by another segment of the transcript where users discuss not to inform anyone of Simon’s death because other wise they would be “nagged” by questions.

UK law, as it stands, demonstrates that it is illegal to assist or attempt to assist suicide online and the Law Commission has concluded recently that the law is able to deal with such offenses.

But none of the site users had been prosecuted for the role they played in Simon’s death.

The counter argument is that any prosecution would depend on proving that the website or chat room directly helped cause a person’s death- which is quite an arduous task to fulfill. Promoters of the chatrooms even go as far as to argue that these chatrooms provide comfort to those who are suicidal. But for a father who has just lost his son, such reasoning seems absurd.

And he is not the only one facing this struggle. Similar incident have occurred around all around the world – recently in Japan the Internet has been blamed for a spate of group suicides, which appear to have been arranged in online chatrooms. The question facing of governments in countries like the UK and Japan is whether to appreciate people’s freedom of speech or take charge to stop this surge of online suicides.

This incident brings up an interesting question on the ethics involved in Internet filtering – governments have never hesitated in filtering information off the Internet which have posed a threat to national security – is this then not a threat?

However, how can a government then guarantee that banning such websites will be able to subdue the spurt of suicides in the country? And in Simon’s case no one knows whether it was the incitation of the users in the chat rooms that pushed him over the edge or his own independent decision.

-Kanupriya Tewari

Censura Não!: Brazilian Bloggers Protest New Cybercrime Bill

amina — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:11:04 -0400

Brazil’s blogosphere has been overflowing with dissent over the most recent cybercrime legislation proposed by Senator Eduardo Azeredo. At the Blog Carnival Against Censorship this Saturday, bloggers expressed their overwhelming opposition to the Digital Crimes Bill. Global Voices Online recently summed up bloggers’ opinions on the bill, which introduces 13 new, punishable cybercrimes. Reporters Without Borders expressed concern over the bill’s unclear wording, warning that the bill is a serious, potential threat to online free speech and has encouraged Internet users to sign an e-petition calling for more transparency in the bill.

Originally introduced in 2005, the bill first received widespread censure from the online community in 2006 for a stipulation that would force users to give detailed information about themselves to their ISPs before being allowed to use the Internet. The legislation was viewed not simply – as Azeredo claimed - an attempt to “discourage hackers, libel, and to stop cybercrime,” but also as a way for ISPs and government agencies to track Internet use; a threat to users right to privacy. Despite the online community’s victory in blocking the bill in 2006, today the bill has taken on a more stringent form, adding to its list of punishable web activities and increasing government surveillance and control.

Despite the Senate’s claim that the bill is intended to curb cybercrime and prevent child abuse, and its titling of a recent Cybercrimes Project report “Threat to the Freedom of Expression of Internet Users in Brazil,” bloggers remain skeptical of their government’s intentions. At the “Carnival,” bloggers such as J.C. Caribé compared this piece of legislation to the authoritarian practices following the military coup of 1964, accusing the Brazilian Congress of “chorando lagrimes de crocodilo” or “crying crocodile tears.” By not clearly defining punishable offenses, the bill provides loopholes for the government to trample on individual rights to privacy and freedom of expression, a dangerous trend which has been common place in a country whose recent history has been dominated by military dictatorships.

All Content Related to Cybercrime and security

Ban ‘suicide chat rooms’

Censura Não!: Brazilian Bloggers Protest New Cybercrime Bill