Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Where Are You Publishing?

timothy posted more than 12 years ago | from the from-au-to-zw dept.

Censorship 266

AndrewRUK writes "A reporter for The Guardian is being prosecuted in Zimbabwe for a report that appeared on the newspaper's website, the newspaper writes in this report. If the case is successful, it would allow Zimbabwe's courts to apply the country's draconian media laws to any online publisher, putting reporters and editors at risk of arrest if they go to Zimbabwe, or any country with extradition treaties with Zimbabwe. Once again, we see a case which raises the question of which courts have jurisdiction over online publishing. Is a UK newspaper, with webservers in the UK, and a site accessable to anyone on the net, publishing only in the UK, or is it publishing everywhere where there's net access?" An issue that just doesn't seem to go away ...

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

C# Sourcecode for Slashdot Troll Bot!!! (-1)

RoboTroll (560160) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709279)

C# Sourcecode for Slashdot Troll Bot!!!

Published under the TPL (Trolling Public License)

usingSystem; []
usingSystem.Co llections;
usingSyst em.Windows.Forms;
usingSystem. Data.OleDb;
usingSystem.Runtime.InteropServices;n amespaceSlash man{
publicclassMainFrm:System.Windows.Forms.Form {[DllI mport("winmm.dll")]
publicstaticexternlongPlaySou nd(Stringlpszname,lon ghModule,longdwFlags);privateboolmanualMode=false;
privateboolcontextTroll=false;privateboolcontext Tr ollOnly=false;
privatestringlatestStory="";privat estringlatestSto ryDisplay="";
privatestringlatestURL="";privatest ringlatestTime= "";
privatestringlastStory="";privateintselTroll= 1;
privateSystem.Randomrand=newSystem.Random();pr ivat eDateTimenextCheck=System.DateTime.Now+System.Time Span.FromSeconds(6);
privateSystem.Windows.Forms. Labellabel1;privateSys tem.Windows.Forms.LinkLabellinkURL;
privateSystem .Windows.Forms.LabellabelTime;private System.Windows.Forms.ButtonbuttonCheck;
privatebo oltrying=false;privateSystem.Timers.Timer theTimer;
privateSystem.Windows.Forms.LabellabelN extCheck;pr ivatestringmainURL="http:privatestringreplyURL="ht tp:privateSystem.Data.DataTabletrollTable;
privat eSystem.Data.DataSettrollSet;privateSystem.D ata.DataTablecontextTable;
privateSystem.Data.Dat aSetcontextSet;privateSystem . indows.Forms.ButtonbtnPost;
privateboolisposting= false;privateintpreinctroll=0 ; BR>privatestringdirBase="";privateSystem.Windows.F o rms.ButtonbtnOptions;
privateSystem.Windows.Forms .ContextMenutrayMenu;pr ivateSystem.Windows.Forms.MenuItemmenuItem1;
priv ateSystem.Windows.Forms.MenuItemmenuItem2;priv ateSystem.Windows.Forms.MenuItemmenuItem3;
protec tedSystem.Windows.Forms.NotifyIcontIcon;priv ateSystem.ComponentModel.IContainercomponents;
pr ivateOleDbConnectiondbConn;privateOleDbDataAdapt erdbTrollsAdapter;
privateSystem.Windows.Forms.La bellbResult;privateO leDbDataAdapterdbContextAdapter;
publicMainFrm(){ InitializeComponent();

protectedover ridevoidDispose(booldisposing){if(dis posing){
if(components!=null){components.Dispose( );}
#regionWindowsFor mDesignergeneratedcodeprivatevoid InitializeComponent(){
this.components=newSystem. ComponentModel.Container ();System.Resources.ResourceManagerresources=newSy stem.Resources.ResourceManager(typeof(MainFrm));
this.linkURL=newSystem.Windows.Forms.LinkLabel();t his.label1=newSystem.Windows.Forms.Label();
this. labelTime=newSystem.Windows.Forms.Label();thi s.labelNextCheck=newSystem.Windows.Forms.Label();
this.buttonCheck=newSystem.Windows.Forms.Button() ; this.theTimer=newSystem.Timers.Timer();
this.btnO ptions=newSystem.Windows.Forms.Button();t his.btnPost=newSystem.Windows.Forms.Button();
thi s.tIcon=newSystem.Windows.Forms.NotifyIcon(this . omponents);this.trayMenu=newSystem.Windows.Forms.C ontextMenu();
this.menuItem1=newSystem.Windows.Fo rms.MenuItem(); this.menuItem3=newSystem.Windows.Forms.MenuItem();
this.menuItem2=newSystem.Windows.Forms.MenuItem( ); this.lbResult=newSystem.Windows.Forms.Label();
(( System.ComponentModel.ISupportInitialize)(this.t heTimer)).BeginInit();this.SuspendLayout();
this. linkURL.Location=newSystem.Drawing.Point(16,4 8);this.linkURL.Name="linkURL";
this.linkURL.Size =newSystem.Drawing.Size(432,23);t his.linkURL.TabIndex=0;
this.linkURL.LinkClicked+ =newSystem.Windows.Forms. LinkLabelLinkClickedEventHandler(this.linkURL_Link Clicked);this.label1.Location=newSystem.Drawing.Po int(16,16);
this.label1.Name="label1";this.label1 .Size=newSyst em.Drawing.Size(80,23);
this.label1.TabIndex=1;th is.label1.Text="LastCheck : ;
this.labelTime.Location=newSystem.Drawing.Point (10 4,16);this.labelTime.Name="labelTime";
this.label Time.Size=newSystem.Drawing.Size(128,23) ; his.labelTime.TabIndex=2;
this.labelTime.Text="00 :00";this.labelNextCheck.Lo cation=newSystem.Drawing.Point(240,16);
this.labe lNextCheck.Name="labelNextCheck";this.lab elNextCheck.Size=newSystem.Drawing.Size(208,23);
this.labelNextCheck.TabIndex=3;this.labelNextCheck . ext="NextCheckin0Seconds";
this.buttonCheck.Locat ion=newSystem.Drawing.Point( 376,120);this.buttonCheck.Name="buttonCheck";
thi s.buttonCheck.TabIndex=4;this.buttonCheck.Text= "CheckNow";
this.buttonCheck.Click+=newSystem.Eve ntHandler(thi s.buttonCheck_Click);this.theTimer.Enabled=true;
this.theTimer.Interval=1000;this.theTimer.Synchron izingObject=this;
this.theTimer.Elapsed+=newSyste m.Timers.ElapsedEve ntHandler(this.OnFireTimer);this.btnOptions.Locati on=newSystem.Drawing.Point(200,120);
this.btnOpti ons.Name="btnOptions";this.btnOptions. TabIndex=5;
this.btnOptions.Text="Options";this.b tnOptions.Cli ck+=newSystem.EventHandler(this.btnOptions_Click);
this.btnPost.Location=newSystem.Drawing.Point(28 8, 120);this.btnPost.Name="btnPost";
this.btnPost.Ta bIndex=7;this.btnPost.Text="PostNow ";
this.btnPost.Click+=newSystem.EventHandler(thi nPost_Click);this.tIcon.ContextMenu=this.trayMenu;
this.tIcon.Icon=((System.Drawing.Icon)(resources .G etObject("tIcon.Icon")));this.tIcon.Text="SlashMan ";
this.tIcon.Visible=true;this.tIcon.DoubleClick +=ne wSystem.EventHandler(this.DblClickTrayIcon);
this .trayMenu.MenuItems.AddRange(newSystem.Windows . orms.MenuItem[]{this.menuItem1,
this.menuItem3,th is.menuItem2});
this.menuItem1.DefaultItem=true;t his.menuItem1.Ind ex=0;
this.menuItem1.Text="Open...";this.menuItem 1.Click +=newSystem.EventHandler(this.menuItem1_Click);
t his.menuItem3.Index=1;this.menuItem3.Text="-";
th is.menuItem2.Index=2;this.menuItem2.Text="Exit";
this.menuItem2.Click+=newSystem.EventHandler(this. menuItem2_Click);this.lbResult.Location=newSystem. Drawing.Point(16,80);
this.lbResult.Name="lbResul t";this.lbResult.Size=n ewSystem.Drawing.Size(432,23);
this.lbResult.TabI ndex=8;this.lbResult.Text="LastR esult:None";
this.AutoScaleBaseSize=newSystem.Dra wing.Size(5,13 );this.ClientSize=newSystem.Drawing.Size(472,149);
this.Controls.AddRange(newSystem.Windows.Forms.C on trol[]{this.lbResult,
this.btnPost,this.btnOption s,
this.buttonCheck,this.labelNextCheck, belTime,this.label1,
this.linkURL});this.Icon=((S ystem.Drawing.Icon)(re sources.GetObject("$this.Icon")));
this.MaximizeB ox=false;this.Name="MainFrm";
this.StartPosition= System.Windows.Forms.FormStartP osition.CenterScreen;this.Text="SlashMan";
this.S izeChanged+=newSystem.EventHandler(this.Size Chang);((System.ComponentModel.ISupportInitialize) (this.theTimer)).EndInit();
this.ResumeLayout(fal se);}#endregion
App lication.Run(newMainFrm());}privatevoidReadDB() {
try{dirBase=System.Diagnostics.Process.GetCurre ntP rocess().MainModule.FileName;
dirBase=dirBase.Sub string(0,dirBase.LastIndexOf("\ \"));System.IO.Directory.CreateDirectory(dirBase);
stringmdbFile="Provider=Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0; Da taSource="+dirBase+"\\Slashman.mdb";dbConn=newOleD bConnection(mdbFile);
dbTrollsAdapter=newOleDbDat aAdapter();OleDbCommand dbInsert=newOleDbCommand("INSERTINTOtrolls(ID,Subj ect,Body)Values(?,?,?)",dbConn);
dbInsert.Paramet ers.Add("ID",OleDbType.Numeric,0," ID");dbInsert.Parameters.Add("Subject",OleDbType.V arChar,255,"Subject");
dbInsert.Parameters.Add("B ody",OleDbType.Char,6553 5,"Body");OleDbCommanddbUpdate=newOleDbCommand("UP DATEtrollsSETSubject=?,Body=?WHEREID=?",dbConn);
dbUpdate.Parameters.Add("Subject",OleDbType.VarCha r,255,"Subject");dbUpdate.Parameters.Add("Body",Ol eDbType.Char,65535,"Body");
dbUpdate.Parameters.A dd("ID",OleDbType.Numeric,0," ID");OleDbCommanddbDel=newOleDbCommand("DELETEFROM trollsWHEREID=?",dbConn);
dbDel.Parameters.Add(ne wOleDbParameter("ID",OleDbT ype.Numeric,0,"ID"));dbTrollsAdapter.InsertCommand =dbInsert;
dbTrollsAdapter.UpdateCommand=dbUpdate ;dbTrollsAda pter.DeleteCommand=dbDel;
dbTrollsAdapter.SelectC ommand=newOleDbCommand("SEL ECT*FROMtrolls",dbConn);dbContextAdapter=newOleDbD ataAdapter();
dbContextAdapter.SelectCommand=newO leDbCommand("SE LECT*FROMContext",dbConn);dbConn.Open();
trollSet =newSystem.Data.DataSet("trollset");trollT able=newDataTable("trolls");
dbTrollsAdapter.Fill (trollTable);trollSet.Tables.A dd(trollTable);
if(trollTable.Rows.Count==0){Syst em.Windows.Forms. MessageBox.Show("Thetrollsdatabaseismissingorempty . );
thrownewSystem.Exception("Thetrollsdatabaseism issi ngorempty.");}contextSet=newSystem.Data.DataSet("c ontextset");
contextTable=newDataTable("Context") ;dbContextAdap ter.Fill(contextTable);
contextSet.Tables.Add(con textTable);this.Visible=t rue;
privateboolSendMail(stringfrom,stringto,stringsubj ect,stringbody){try{
System.Web.Mail.MailMessaget heMail=newSystem.Web.M ail.MailMessage();theMail.From="";
theMail.Bo dy=body;theMail.BodyFormat=System.Web.Ma il.MailFormat.Text;
System.Web.Mail.SmtpMail.Smtp Server="your.server.c om";System.Web.Mail.SmtpMail.Send(theMail);
retur ntrue;}catch(Exceptione){
System.Windows.Forms.Me ssageBox.Show(e.Message);re turnfalse;}
this.label Time.Text=latestTime;this.linkURL.Text=l atestStoryDisplay;}
privatestringGetTaggedText(st ringfrom,stringtagBeg in,stringtagEnd){intbegin=from.IndexOf(tagBegin);
if(begin==-1)thrownewSystem.Exception("tagBeginno t found");stringretstr=from.Substring(begin+tagBegin . ength);
intend=retstr.IndexOf(tagEnd);if(end==-1) thrownewS ystem.Exception("tagEndnotfound");
returnretstr.S ubstring(0,end);}privatestringStripT ags(stringfrom){
stringret=from;intbegin=ret.Inde xOf("");
while(begin=0){intend=ret.IndexOf("",beg in);
if(end==-1)break;ret=ret.Remove(begin,(end-b egin)+ 1);
privatest ringGetHref(stringfrom){stringtagHref="AH REF=\"";
stringret=from;intbegin=ret.IndexOf(tagH ref);
if(begin0)thrownewSystem.Exception("GetHref failed( 1).");begin+=tagHref.Length;
intend=ret.IndexOf(" \"",begin);if(end0)thrownewSys tem.Exception("GetHreffailed(2).");
ret=ret.Subst ring(begin,end-begin);if(!ret.StartsW ith("http:"))ret="http:"+ret;
returnret;}privates tringDoHttpPost(stringinURI,Sys tem.Collections.Specialized.NameValueCollectionval ues){
System.Net.WebClientcli=newSystem.Net.WebCl ient(); byte[]resp=cli.UploadValues(inURI,values);
return System.Text.Encoding.ASCII.GetString(resp);} privatestringDoHttpGet(stringinURI){
System.Net.H ttpWebRequestreq=(System.Net.HttpWebRe quest)System.Net.WebRequest.Create(inURI);req.Cook ieContainer=newSystem.Net.CookieContainer();
req. CookieContainer.Add(newSystem.Net.Cookie("user ",SlashCfg.userCookie,"/",""));System. Net.WebResponseresp=req.GetResponse();
System.IO. StreamReadersr=newSystem.IO.StreamReader (resp.GetResponseStream(),System.Text.Encoding.ASC II);returnsr.ReadToEnd();}
privatevoidPrePro(refs tringtheData){theData=theDat a.Replace("Your Rights Online: Where Are You Publishing?",latestStory);
theData=theData.Replac e("191",selTroll.ToString()) ; heData=theData.Replace("193",trollTable.Rows.Count . oString());}
privatevoidUpdateStatus(stringstat){ tIcon.Text=sta t;
labelNextCheck.Text=stat;labelNextCheck.Update ();}
privatevoidPromptTrollData(outstringsubj,out string body){subj="";
body="";GetTrollgt=newGetTroll(lat estStory,latestU RL);
gt.ShowDialog(this);if(!gt.accepted)thrownew System . xception("AbortedEntry");
subj=gt.thesubj;body=gt .thebody;
if((subj=="")||(body==""))thrownewSyste m.Exception ("AbortedEntry");}privatevoidGetTrollData(outstrin gsubj,outstringbody){
inti=contextTable.Rows.Coun t;subj="";
for(i=0;ico ntextTable.Rows.Count;i++){if(latestSto ry.IndexOf(contextTable.Rows[i]["IfContain"].ToStr ing())=0){
intidx=(int)contextTable.Rows[i]["Post "];subj=trol lTable.Rows[idx-1]["Subject"].ToString();
body=tr ollTable.Rows[idx-1]["Body"].ToString();bre ak;}
if(contex tTrollOnly){thrownewSystem.Exception("Noc ontexttrollexistsforthispost.");}
preinctroll=Sla shCfg.curTrollIndex;if(SlashCfg.cur Troll==0){
SlashCfg.curTrollIndex++;if(SlashCfg.c urTrollIndex =trollTable.Rows.Count)SlashCfg.curTrollIndex=1;
selTroll=S lashCfg.curTroll;}if(selTroll=trollTable . ows.Count){
thrownewSystem.Exception("Theselected trollisgreate rthanthenumberoftrollsinthetable.");}subj=trollTab le.Rows[selTroll]["Subject"].ToString();
body=tro llTable.Rows[selTroll]["Body"].ToString(); }if(SlashCfg.appendPostfix){
body+="P"+SlashCfg.a ppendPosttext;}PrePro(refsubj) ; BR>PrePro(refbody);}privatevoidPostComment(){
/*s tringxtheSubj,xtheBody;
GetTrollData(outxtheSubj, outxtheBody);System.Windo ws.Forms.MessageBox.Show(xtheBody,xtheSubj);
retu rn;*/
if(man ualMode)PlaySound(Application.StartupPath+"\ \alert.wav",0,1);try{
stringtheSubj="",theBody="" ;if(!manualMode){
GetTrollData(outtheSubj,outtheB ody);}UpdateStatus( "Readingcommentspage...");
stringpageText=DoHttpG et(latestURL);stringtagSID=" INPUTTYPE=\"HIDDEN\"NAME=\"sid\"VALUE=\"";
string tagCID="INPUTTYPE=\"HIDDEN\"NAME=\"cid\"VALU E=\"";stringtagPID="INPUTTYPE=\"HIDDEN\"NAME=\"pid \"VALUE=\"";
stringtagKEY="INPUTTYPE=\"HIDDEN\"NA ME=\"formkey\" VALUE=\"";stringtagEND="\"";
stringSID=GetTaggedT ext(pageText,tagSID,tagEND);st ringCID=GetTaggedText(pageText,tagCID,tagEND);
st ringPID=GetTaggedText(pageText,tagPID,tagEND);st ringreplyPage=replyURL+"?";
replyPage+="sid="+SID +"&";replyPage+="pid="+PID+"& ";
replyPage+="cid="+CID+"&";replyPage+="op=Reply &mod e=flat&commentsort=0&threshold=-1";
UpdateStatus( "RequestingReplyPage...");pageText=Do HttpGet(replyPage);
SID=GetTaggedText(pageText,ta gSID,tagEND);PID=GetT aggedText(pageText,tagPID,tagEND);
stringKEY=GetT aggedText(pageText,tagKEY,tagEND);Sy stem.Collections.Specialized.NameValueCollectionnv s=newSystem.Collections.Specialized.NameValueColle ction();
nvs .Add("threshold","-1");nvs.Add("commentsort","0 ");
nvs.Add("unickname",SlashCfg.username);nvs.Add(" up asswd",SlashCfg.password);
nvs.Add("op","Submit") ;nvs.Add("posttype","1");
if(manualMode){PromptTr ollData(outtheSubj,outtheBo dy);}
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(21000);}nvs.Add("pos tersubj",theSubj);
nvs.Add("postercomment",theBod y);pageText=DoHttpPo st(replyURL,nvs);
stringtagErrorResult="!--Errort ype:--";stringtagPo stResult="FACE=\"arial,helvetica\"SIZE=\"4\"COLOR= \"#FFFFFF\"B";
stringtagPostResultEnd="/B";string PostResult=GetTa ggedText(pageText,tagPostResult,tagPostResultEnd);
boolisOK=(pageText.IndexOf(tagErrorResult)==-1); if ((!isOK)&&(PostResult=="PostComment")){
try{PostR esult=GetTaggedText(pageText,tagErrorResu lt,".");}catch{}
while((PostResult.Length0)&&((Po stResult[0]32)||(P ostResult[0]127)))PostResult=PostResult.Substring( 1);}if(isOK){
CID=GetTaggedText(pageText,tagCID,t agEND);lbResult . ext="PostedComment";
lbR esult.Text="ERROR:"+PostResult;}isposting=false ;
throw; }UpdateStatus("PostComplete.");}
privatevoidTryRe ad(){if(trying)return;
trying=true;stringtagTitle =@"FACE=""arial,helvetic a""SIZE=""4""COLOR=""#FFFFFF""B";
stringtagTitleE nd="/B";stringtagUrl="PB(/B";
stringtagUrlEnd="BR eadMore.../B";UpdateStatus("Che ckingNow...");
stringpa gestr=DoHttpGet(mainURL);latestStory=Strip Tags(GetTaggedText(pagestr,tagTitle,tagTitleEnd));
latestStoryDisplay=latestStory;latestURL=GetHref (G etTaggedText(pagestr,tagUrl,tagUrlEnd));
latestUR L+="&threshold=-1";latestTime=System.DateT ime.Now.ToString();
if((lastStory.Length0)&&(late stStory!=lastStory)){ PlayAlert();
catch(System.Excep tione){if(e.Message.IndexOf("(40 4)")0){
SlashCfg.curTrollIndex=preinctroll;retryP ost=true; }
lastS tory=latestStory;nextCheck=DateTime.Now.AddSe conds(SlashCfg.checkIntervalMin+rand.Next(SlashCfg . heckIntervalMax-SlashCfg.checkIntervalMin));}
els e{nextCheck=DateTime.Now.AddSeconds(5);}
UpdateFo rm();trying=false;}
privatevoidbuttonCheck_Click( objectsender,System.E ventArgse){TryRead();}
privatevoidOnFireTimer(obj ectsender,System.Timers. ElapsedEventArgse){if(trying)return;
if(isposting )return;if(DateTime.NownextCheck){
TryRead();}Upd ateStatus("NextCheckin"+(int)((nextC heck-DateTime.Now).TotalSeconds)+"Seconds.");}
pr ivatevoidNavigateLink(){try{System.Diagnostics.P rocess.Start(latestURL);}
catch{}}privatevoidPlay Alert()
{}privatevoidlinkURL_LinkClicked(objectse nder,Syst em.Windows.Forms.LinkLabelLinkClickedEventArgse){
NavigateLink();}privatevoidbtnPost_Click(objectse n der,System.EventArgse){
if((latestURL==null)||(la testURL=="ERROR")||(lates tURL.Length==0)){System.Windows.Forms.MessageBox.S how("Mustgetthepostfirst!(PressCheckNow)","Error", System.Windows.Forms.MessageBoxButtons.OK,System.W indows.Forms.MessageBoxIcon.Stop);
privatevoidbtnOptions_Cli ck(objectsender,System.Ev entArgse){Slashman.OptionsFrmopts=newSlashman.Opti onsFrm();
opts.trollTable=trollTable;opts.ShowDia log(this);
if(opts.pressedOK){dbTrollsAdapter.Upd ate(trollTab le);
trollTabl e.RejectChanges();}}
privatevoidShowMe(){this.Vis ible=true;
this.Activate();this.WindowState=Syste m.Windows.Fo rms.FormWindowState.Normal;}
privatevoidHideMe(){ this.Visible=false;}
privatevoidmenuItem1_Click(o bjectsender,System.Eve ntArgse){ShowMe();}
privatevoidmenuItem2_Click(ob jectsender,System.Eve ntArgse){this.Close();}
privatevoidSizeChang(obje ctsender,System.EventArgs e){if(this.WindowState==System.Windows.Forms.FormW indowState.Minimized){
privatevoidDb lClickTrayIcon(objectsender,System.Ev entArgse){ShowMe();}

Unfair, how can I compete for FP with a bot? (-1)

Metrollica (552191) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709291)

Where can I get the JAVA version?

Re:C# Sourcecode for Slashdot Troll Bot!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709338)

is the TPL an "open sores" approved license?

FP (-1)

Metrollica (552191) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709281)


Sklyarov (4, Insightful)

AntiNorm (155641) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709292)

putting reporters and editors at risk of arrest if they go to Zimbabwe

Sounds almost like the Dmitry Sklyarov case...

Re:Sklyarov (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709311)

You only care about him because he's an open sores commie like you.

Re:Sklyarov (3, Interesting)

nuggz (69912) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709342)

Except the product Sklyarov wrote was sold in the US. If the article was in a newspaper or magazine sold in Zimbabwe then it would be more similar.

They are different in specifics, however they are similiar that people are doing things completely legal and appropriate, being subject to stupid laws of faraway countries.

Best advice is to not go where they have sufficiently stupid laws.

Re:Sklyarov (1)

Arandir (19206) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709401)

Then Microsoft, the MPAA or RIAA, or Adobe must be involved. After all, every abuse of programming rights has to originate the Great Satan that is the United States...

fags! (-1)

mobydill (218466) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709295)

Fuck you twinks! He's a hairy biker bear up your asshole, slashdot faggots!

Silly Zimbabwe. (1)

Photar (5491) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709296)

I don't see any reason why one country's citizens should be responsible for following the laws of another country if they're in their home country.

Re:Silly Zimbabwe. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709423)

silly United States.
Poor Dmitri

If someone's stupid enough (3, Insightful)

vegetablespork (575101) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709298)

to travel to a country where they enforce their unjust laws against people who 'broke' them in a country where their actions weren't illegal . . . uh, never mind.

Re:If someone's stupid enough (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709340)

qu173 fr4|\||1j, 7|-|47 15 4b501u731j pr3p0573r0u5. z1|\/|b4b\/\/3 d035 |\|07 |
-|4\/3 7|-|3 r19|-|7 70 3x73|\|d 175 0b53551\/3 (0|\|7r01 0\/3r 7|-|3 |\/|3d14 7
0 07|-|3r (0u|\|7r135. \/\/3 5|-|0u1d |\|u|3 7|-|3 b4574rd5, b3(4u53 7|-|3j 5|-
|0u1d |\|07 b3 4b13 70 |-|4\/3 4 57r4|\|93|-|01d 0|\| \/\/|-|37|-|3r 0r |\|07 07
|-|3r (0u|\|7r135 (4|\| pub115|-| 4r71(135 4b0u7 7|-|3|\/|. 7|-|15 5375 4 d4|\|93r0u5

Re:If someone's stupid enough (0, Offtopic)

vegetablespork (575101) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709353)

I don't know which is worse. That you posted it, or that I can read it.

Re:If someone's stupid enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709431)

So for us that aren't in the know, what does he say, and what is the method used to encode?

Re:If someone's stupid enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709443)

He said:
Quite frankly, that is absolutely preposterous. zimbabwe does not have the right to extend its obsessive control over the media to other countries. we should nuke the bastards, because they should not be able to have a stranglehold on whether or not other countries can publish articles about them. This sets a dangerous precedent.

The encoding method is "leetspeek"--if you look hard, you can read it (assuming you really couldn't read it and weren't just trying to see if I'd really type it all).

vegetablespork, posting anonymously to preserve my precious karma

Re:warning! blankpostbyhandybundlerdetected (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709568)

Application to harmful programmers (0)

Drunken Coward (574991) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709300)

This brings up an interesting point I have thought of. If I create a virus that takes advantage of some new exploit in IE/Outlook Express that spreads internationally, should be held accountable for my actions in all countries or just the one I originate in. It would seriously suck to be effectivley banned from visiting 50+ countries for fear of having my ass hauled into court the moment I step off the plane.

Why Debian people won't try Windows XP (-1)

Metrollica (552191) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709312)

apt-cache show winxp
W: Unable to locate package winxp
$ apt-cache show windows
W: Unable to locate package windows
$ apt-cache show windows_xp
W: Unable to locate package windows_xp
$ apt-cache show windows xp
W: Unable to locate package windows
W: Unable to locate package xp
$ apt-cache show WinXP
W: Unable to locate package WinXP
$ apt-cache search windows xp | grep window
xpm2wico - an xpm to windows .ico converter

Interesting connection. (5, Insightful)

Mike the Mac Geek (182790) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709315)

Zimbabwe prosecutes people outside of it's borders for breaking internal laws.

Sounds a lot like the US and the Skylarov case huh?

Or DeCSS? Or any of the forthcoming lawsuits?

We are no better. I hate to say it, but it's true.

Re:Interesting connection. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709350)

We are no better. I hate to say it, but it's true

Speak for yourself. I'm not a smelly, illiterate nier.

Re:Interesting connection. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709433)

You're right. A smelly, illiterate nigger is better than a drooling, racist fuckwit like you.

Re:Interesting connection. (1)

faceboy (582078) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709444)

comparing the US to zimbabwe is absolutely fucking ridiculous. mugabe is essentially, Black Hitler. your comment smacks of ignorance.

Re:Interesting connection. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709485)

Yeah, and the US stand for freedom and justice for all*

Afterall, locking up people outside the legal system, detaining people on legal technicalities without trial or legal aid and with no rights whatsoever, making those who don't agree appear like being terrorist huggers isn't really bad, it's good because the good guys are doing it, and since the good guys can't do bad things, everything they do is per definition good.

* Provided they're not black, arab, muslim, hispanic, poor, crippled, handicapped, hindu...

Re:Interesting connection. (2)

Mike the Mac Geek (182790) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709488)

Jesus Christ.

It was a comment on the similarity of laws between Mugabe's regime in Zimbabwe, and our government and its laws. How two toally different systems of government can create the same draconian laws about things totally out of their control.

Grow up. If I have to explain my point to you, maybe Slashdot is not the place for you, ok?

Re:Interesting connection. (1)

MrWa (144753) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709574)

Sounds a lot like the US and the Skylarov case huh?

This is not exactly comparable. While I don't agree with the Skylarov case, that was something done in the U.S. (the distibution of the code anyway).

This case does nothing. Makes no real precedent. It just means that people publishing something that Zimbabwe does not like will have problems if they go there - not suprising, given the government's track record there.

Libel is hard to prove... (-1, Offtopic)

User 956 (568564) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709316)

In 1964, the Supreme Court issued a ruling that revolutionized libel law in the United States. The famous decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan once and for all created a national rule that squared more fully with the free press guarantees of the First Amendment. In its ruling, the Court decided that public officials no longer could sue successfully for libel unless reporters or editors were guilty of "actual malice" when publishing false statements about them.

And just what is malice when it comes to proving libel? Retired Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., who wrote the Sullivan decision, defined it as "knowledge that the [published information] was false" or that it was published "with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." In other words, public officials no longer could sue for libel simply by proving that something that had been broadcast or printed about them was false. Now they would have to prove that a journalist had knowingly printed false information while making little, if any, attempt to distinguish truth from lies.

The Supreme Court later extended its so-called Sullivan rule to cover "public figures," meaning individuals who are not in public office but who are still newsworthy because of their prominence in the public eye. Over the years, American courts have ruled that this category includes celebrities in the entertainment field, well-known writers, athletes, and others who often attract attention in the media.

For purely private individuals, the test for proving libel is not as difficult. Although Supreme Court rulings such as the Sullivan decision apply everywhere in the United States, most states continue to have their own libel laws that cover private individuals. Usually those laws require that public figures who believe they have been libeled prove that a journalist has been negligent when publishing false information about them. Negligence, like malice, is a legal term that generally means carelessness on the part of a reporter or editor. Because private individuals have more reason than public officials to be left alone in the media, American libel laws recognize that they are entitled to more legal protection against false statements made about them.

In December 1990, for example, a judge on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court won a $6 million libel verdict against the Philadelphia Inquirer newspaper because of a series of articles it carried in 1983 that suggested he was guilty of influence peddling. And in one of the largest libel verdicts ever reached against the media, a former district attorney from Texas named Victor Feazell was awarded $58 million in April 1991 after a Dallas television station accused him of accepting bribes to fix drunken driving cases. "This verdict sends a message to the rest of the media to get your facts straight," Feazell said after the jury announced its verdict.

Two months later, a state district court judge not only upheld the judgment but included a provision adding a 10 percent annual interest charge to the award if the station appealed the case and lost. A settlement was reached shortly afterwards.

In this and other cases, the person bringing the libel suit has the burden of proving that he or she has been libeled. In other words, a public figure must prove that a reporter not only published false information but also did so recklessly and maliciously without attempting to determine whether it was true, much like the Andreesen v. Freguson case in which it was implied that Andreesen was a bearded linux hippie that lives in his parents' basement. However, Libel cases are not limited to disputes between the media and the people they cover. In July 1989, the American Express Company admitted to spreading false information about an international banker who controlled New York's Republic National Bank. When the banker's attorney threatened to sue for libel, American Express confessed to its role and agreed to donate $8 million to charities as a settlement in the case.

Besides making distinctions between public and private figures, American courts also have ruled that various kinds of published information are generally immune from libel charges. For example, it is almost impossible for a writer to be found guilty of libel if the writing deals with opinions rather than facts. "Under the First Amendment, there is no such thing as a false idea," the Supreme Court said in a 1974 libel ruling.

The ongoing debate over libel has prompted at least one proposal for a new set of libel laws that would make it easier for public officials and others to prove their cases. The proposal -- drafted by a private committee of lawyers, law professors, and media representatives -- also would eliminate large financial awards that can be assessed against media groups found guilty of libel.

Re:Libel is hard to prove... (2)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709357)

Nice long reply, but what the fuck man.

What the hell does US law and US supreme court rulings have to do with an issue between Zimbabwe and the UK.

Re:Libel is hard to prove... (1)

User 956 (568564) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709382)

Despite what you may think, given the differences with regards to other aspects of law (i.e. free speech, due process protections granted in the U.S. constitution, etc) Libel law in the US and UK is actually quite similar. Perhaps my point wasn't illustrated clearly enough, but at any rate, I highly doubt this case will be granted any merit given the current state of libel law in a first world nation like the UK.

Re:Libel is hard to prove... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709440)

You didn;t have a point, you stole the article from here []

Hard to prove in the US; easy in many other places (3, Insightful)

billstewart (78916) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709400)

Libel is hard to prove in the US, because we have both old and new legal traditions making it difficult. That's not the case in many other countries
  • Many countries have laws against libelling the government or the ruling party, which are infinitely abusable.
  • Many British-derived legal systems don't do that, but do still make it easy for individuals to win libel cases.
US traditions are inherited from several cases in the British Colonies in North America
  • Truth as a defense - John Peter Zenger was a newspaper publisher in New York who wrote things about the British governor that the Gov didn't like, and got sued for libel. Zenger argued successfully to the jury that while the Gov may not like what he said, what he said was true, and saying so shouldn't be punishable.
  • Jury limitations on convictions - William Penn was accused of illegally preaching Quakerism, and the jury acquitted, because they believed the law to be unjust, following the traditions that had been gradually evolving under English Common Law. The judge threw them in jail to get them to change their minds, they appealed to a higher judge and got released, which substantially strengthened precedents about juries' ability to judge the law as well as the facts, and in the case of libel laws, this particularly affects a juries likelihood not to convict someone for libel even if the plaintiff really really doesn't like what was said about him.

Re:Libel is hard to prove... (1)

Jonathunder (105885) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709437)

The parent post is from "Libel Law in the United States" [] by Steven Pressman. It is most of that article, hardly changed at all.

Is the poster Steven Pressman? Or is this plagiarism?

Re:Libel is hard to prove... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709465)

It is plagerism. Look at his posting history []

Re:Libel is hard to prove... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709564)

Hey, alright, ACs throwing around plagiarism insults. What, don't have the balls to post with your account? Did it occur to you that the parent actually wrote the article?

No? That's what I thought. Oh, And while you're still feeling smug about your intellectual superiority, I think you need some spelling lessons []

Re:Libel is hard to prove... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709583)

Did it occur to you that the parent actually wrote the article?

And all those others?

fault of Zimbabwe ISPs (4, Insightful)

colmore (56499) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709324)


the material is available in print in England and on English computers; it is therefore the fault of Zimbabwe's ISPs for connecting to the offending servers.

if nations want to censor the internet, they should do it themselves. it would be funny to watch them realize the futility of attempting to stop information.

Re:fault of Zimbabwe ISPs (-1, Troll)

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM (537317) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709366)

Alright, then find some blue sheets of active US missile silo, and upload them online. Lets see how difficult it is to stop information. I'll send you oranges in jail.

Re:fault of Zimbabwe ISPs (2)

colmore (56499) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709402)

if i did that in the USA, i'd be breaking US laws, of course i'd be in jail.

assuming i found the sheets in the US, i'd be breaking the law before i even publish.

on the other hand, the publication broke absolutely no law by writing an article and publishing it in the UK.

Re:fault of Zimbabwe ISPs (2)

ImaLamer (260199) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709527)

if nations want to censor the internet, they should do it themselves. it would be funny to watch them realize the futility of attempting to stop information.

Even though this specific case is based on more general problems your statement still fits.

I am borderline on what some countries want to block. For example; personally I think that laws forbidding people to buy Nazi merchandise in France is wrong (I fully understand their issue which makes it even harder for me) but someone needs to make an effort to keep the French people from buying that merchandise. The only people that should be making that effort is the government who made the law.

Don't allow routing to the offending server, ask that mailing packages be marked if offending import laws, censor if you must! Just don't hold the rest of us responsible.

If anyone should be put on the town square and chastised it should be the inept Internet professionals that work in Zimbabwe. Maybe they need to add another law to their books: allow DNS entries for or route to an offending host and face up (to whatever punishment they love).

Rights to free speech don't exist everywhere and neither does governmental control of thought and speech.

If you break a law in another country then it is them who punishes you. If you break a law of let's say Sealand then no other nation has a right to punish you - that in fact could be seen as a challenge to a nations soverignty.

When are the sane people going to wisen up to the Internet? Have they all gone into hiding since '95?

What's the difference from newspapers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709533)

It's weird - there are several major newspapers that are available worldwide, just as the internet is available worldwide. I don't see Zimbabwe suing, say, a major New York newspaper? What's the difference. Both reports were published in a different country in accordance to that nation's laws - just because the report is available for viewing in Zimbabwe - both the newspaper and the internet story, doesn't give Zimbabwe the right to sue them. It's outside their jurisdiction - and I think the national leaders should step in and put a stop to this joke...

Extradition treaty with Zimbabwe? (5, Informative)

Knife_Edge (582068) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709326)

How many countries do you suppose have or will honor an extradition treaty with a country whose strongman president Robert Mugabe (and all of his staff) is currently banned [] from traveling in the United States (and also the European Union if I remember correctly)? Especially in a ridiculous case like this... The EU and the US have also invoked trade sanctions against this country. Clearly, everyone has great respect for it and its 'laws.'

Re:Extradition treaty with Zimbabwe? (1)

Quirk (36086) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709396)

If recent memory serves me right Zimbabwe has also been tossed out of the Commonwealth.

Re:Extradition treaty with Zimbabwe? (1)

wilgamesh (308197) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709457)

Yes. No one will bother with whatever Zimbabwe does. Mugabe ruthlessly suppressed independent media and speech during the elections earlier this year. His govt is known for the gangs of vigilantes that roamed from house to house kicking the crap out of people who professed support for the opposition party.

Well, I should really say no one will bother except for other dictatorships that will seize upon this chance to enact similar laws against journalists. This is not really a precedent-setting case, as much as simply an unsurprising reflection of the ineptitude and corruption of Mugabe's government.

Re:Extradition treaty with Zimbabwe? (2)

ceejayoz (567949) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709497)

Somehow I doubt it'd be all that difficult for the US or NATO or the EU to put together a rescue operation if anyone does get jailed, too. Zimbabwe's military isn't exactly well-trained...

Re:Extradition treaty with Zimbabwe? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709520)

The western political elites all hate Mugabe because he liberated Zimbabwe from colonial rule (It used to be British Rhodesia). We in the US never learn about the African Revolutions of the 1960's and 70's. Almost every sub-Saharan country successfully revoted against their foreign colonial rulers - It happened in Angola, Zimbabwe and Mozambique; it has been ongoing in the Congo, where the CIA assasinated the democratically elected president Patrice Lumumba in the 1960s.

Henry Kissinger desperately wanted to start another Vietnam in Angola, where the Cubans had sent troops to fight off an invasion by the South African army, who were attempting to crush the Angolan revolution. Again, we in the US rarely hear about any of this. The US backed the Angolan tribal warlord Jonas Savimbi and his UNITA faction for years, until he was finally killed in battle with the Angolan military.

So you see, the western political elites will always hate people like Mugabe in Zimbabwe just as they hated Patrice Lumumba - and we all know what happened to him.

I personally don't know that much about Mugabe; perhaps he really is a despot. Understand this however - the US backs much more brutal military dictators and regimes than the Mugabe regime. Just to put it in perspective - the Israeli military has shot more than 40 foreign journalists with either rubber or live munitions in the last year and a half, killing more than 7.

I personally am against censorship of any form, including the filtering of content on Slashdot. What's the point of posting my opinion if it is subject to revision or dismissal? If people hate Jon Katz, let them flame.

What bothers me is the hypocrisy. I am for maintaining moral standards - I just want to see those standards applied evenly across the board.

Intended Audience (1)

PhillC (84728) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709327)

Eventually I think it is going to have a lot to with the intended audience of the information. For example, I know that a company is allowed to have a Swedish website, that they derive income from, without incurring a tax liability in that country if they do not actively market in the Swedish marketplace. How exactly do you define that ? It's a fine line to draw.

Other similar cases include the sale of hate material on popular online auction sites. Both Yahoo (although their European operations are now largely in the process of being shut down) and eBay heavily restrict their members from buying and selling Nazi memorabilia. On eBay even though US based sellers are allowed to list Nazi memorabilia (as long as it is not inciting hate) in US Dollars, any member with a country identification of Germany is not allowed to bid on such items.

Moving the discussion in to the realm of access to all published information is going to prove very interesting. Eventually I think it will be up to the country, Zimbabwe in this case, to regulate the content users based their see. An almost impossible task but this is essentially what China is attempting to do.

Whether this is right or wrong is another question entirely.

Background: Zimbabwe vs UK (5, Informative)

mccalli (323026) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709329)

For those who might not realise it, I should point out that there is an overtly political agenda to this, rather than a straightforward judicial one.

Specifically, Zimbabwe's President Mugabe is virulantly anti-British. Following the recent 'elections', fixed according to all international observers, Mugabe has expelled any BBC reporters and most other British journalists.

This is because of the UK press' reporting of the 'War Veterans' issue, where Mugabe encourages members of his old revolutionary guard to simply take white farmers' land, usually by violence, quite often by killing the farmer in question.

Mugabe claims that this policy is Britain's fault, and that the farmers should look to Britain for compensation - indeed that they should leave Zimbabwe and go to Britain.

Now, the political rights and wrongs of these are outside the scope of this discussion. However, I think it important that people see this move for what it is - another anti-British move by the Mugabe regime, rather than a carefully thought out and well-constructed legal case.


Re:Background: Zimbabwe vs UK (1)

Fantanicity (583135) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709424)

The journalist facing 2 years in prison is American.

Re:Background: Zimbabwe vs UK (3, Insightful)

gehrehmee (16338) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709525)

Isn't that exactly the point? International application of local laws brings anyone face to face with even the extremest political agendas of all countries involved.

News for Nerds? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709330) people don't even seem to have any clear ideas what "our" rights online are. You just like to scream our rights are being taken all the time.

filthy liberal scum.

Consider the government... (4, Insightful)

swb (14022) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709332)

Considering that Robert Mugabe is -- despite the stiff competition continent-wide -- the leading klepto-autocrat in Africa, is it any surprise? He's willing to steal elections and kill the only productive segment of his economy in the blantantly dishonest name of "land reform."

Why should it be at all surprising that he's willing to go after journalists who expose his regime? I suppose it is surprising to starry-eyed marxists who still buy into the collective bullshit of African anti-colonial revolution.

All the more shameful is Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu and the rest of the putatively democratic ANC's refusal to speak out against Mugabe and his thugs.

Maybe now that western journalists are actually starting to get a firsthand taste of Mugabe-style government they'll wipe the haze from their eyes and start doing the kind of reporting that might help bring an end to the politically correct refusal to believe that an African govenrment can do no wrong, especially if it involves whitey getting his.

Re:Consider the government... (5, Insightful)

Goonie (8651) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709405)

All the more shameful is Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu and the rest of the putatively democratic ANC's refusal to speak out against Mugabe and his thugs.

Yeah, it's pretty disappointing, but to be fair it's a lot easier to say those kinds of things when you don't have to live next door to them. The Australian government is, for instance, mealy-mouthed about Indonesia's corruption and thuggery, mainly because there are certain things we need from Indonesia (like not letting drug and people smugglers through, and shutting down Al-Queda cells there) and if we don't kiss their arse occasionally they are petulant enough to stop doing those things to spite us. Similar things probably apply WRT Zimbabwe and SA. They did have the courtesy to go along (once beaten round the head by the UK, NZ, and to a lesser extent Australia) with the suspension of Zimbabwe from the British Commonwealth (which says to the world that they now regard Zimbabwe as undemocratic).

Of course there's the issue that some in the ANC, whatever the leadership knows, probably have a sneaking sympathy for people sticking it to rich white landowners.

Re:Consider the government... (1)

rjk (10763) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709507)

> All the more shameful is Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu and the rest of the putatively democratic ANC's refusal to speak out against Mugabe and his thugs.

They are not entirely silent, for example: ws id_739000/739258.stm ws id_1754000/1754307.stm

Re:Consider the government... (2)

Ami Ganguli (921) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709569)

In fairness, I've seen both Mandela and Tutu speak up against Mugabe in interviews. I'm not sure what else they can do considering neither is currently in governement.

Thabo Mbeki, on the other hand, is the current president of South Africa and he has no excuse. This and his bizarre statements about AIDS make one wonder if there's any hope of good government in Africa in this century.

peace post (-1)

cmdr_shithead (527909) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709333)

No More War!

seems rediculous... (1)

konichiwa (216809) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709335)

If I write and publish a book in the U.S., should I be held accountable for the laws on book publishing in Zimbabwe?

No way. If they want to prevent certain internet sites (or books in this case) from propogating to their people, that's their own right as a government (hypothetically ... no I dont believe in government censorship but they would do it anyway) ... but its not my responsibility to make sure that my work is compliant with ALL LAWS EVERYWHERE.

Re:seems rediculous... (1)

meringuoid (568297) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709359)

If I write and publish an e-book reader in Russia, should I be held accountable for the laws on e-book publishing in the United States?

No way. If they want to prevent certain internet sites (or e-book readers in this case) from propagating to their people, that's their own right as a government (hypothetically ... no I don't believe in government censorship but they would do it anyway) ... but it's not my responsibility to make sure that my work is compliant with ALL LAWS EVERYWHERE.

Re:seems rediculous... (2)

sconeu (64226) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709377)

To be honest, I think the Sklyarov case is bogus, too. But....

They had a (somewhat ersatz) physical presence in the US (through their E-Commerce server), and sold product in the US.

If the Guardian is not charging for content, has no physical presence (even an ersatz one), then the cases are different.

That said, FREE DMITRY!

Re:seems rediculous... (2)

Stonehand (71085) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709455)

Just don't go visiting there if you antagonize them. Same goes for pretty much any domain ruled with an iron fist.

If you visit, it doesn't matter if you shouldn't be held accountable, since you quite possibly would be. If life were fair, Mugabe would already imprisoned or dead for being a corrupt, incompetent, race-baiting dictator who cares more about crushing all dissent such as the MDC instead of, oh, averting famine associated with the dramatic drop in food production which just might possibly have something to do with the fact that ZANU-PF goons have been terrorizing the most productive farmers throughout his country.

if only... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709351)

if only all those gov'ts were doin their jobs and helping the people and makin life better etc. then they'd have nothing to worry about....

all those corrput people are very annoying...

yes i mean the us gov't too :)

What the fuck is this shit? (-1, Offtopic)

Bowie J. Poag (16898) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709354)

God, this is so fucking relevant. Thank God timothy is here to alert us to MEDIA ABUSE IN ZIMBABWE.

Re:What the fuck is this shit? (0)

Pave Low (566880) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709385)

well said. I'm sure this article would be helpful to those slashdot readers who are planning on going zimbabwe.

These people would also have to be unaware of the larger issue of the current political situation there, where the country is run by a "President" who fixes elections and has total control of the country (sorta like slashdot, huh?).

Slashdot: Fighting for Your Rights Online in Zimbabwe.

Well... (1, Offtopic)

cirby (2599) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709406)

...since you put it in those particular words, you'd have a chance of being prosecuted for public use of profanity in any number of countries if this were accepted practice worldwide.


cmdr_shithead (527909) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709473)


The Smurfs: Socialist Propaganda (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709356)

I like most of my generation grew up watching the Smurfs. I loved them so much that I tuned in every Saturday morning to see what crazy hijinks those lovable little blue creatures would get up to.

It is just now that I have realized what I was really tuning into each and every Saturday morning was in actuality Socialist Propaganda!! Yes that is correct, Papa Smurf and all of his little Smurf minions are not the happy little characters Hanna Barbara would have us believe! The cartoon was really created by the Russian government in order to indoctrinate the youngest members of western society with Socialist beliefs and ideals thus destroying their resistance to the imminent Russian invasion that was to occur when this generation (my generation) grew up.

To prove my point I submit that 1.) They live in a communal village and are discouraged to leave the village without the company of their fellow Smurfs. 2.) Every Smurf has his own specific job and does not deviate from that job. The job even becomes part of their personality and their name (Brainy Smurf, Handy Smurf, etc.) 3.) If ever a Smurf decides to strike out on his own he is cast into danger in some way of another and it is up to the collective to save him. 4.) Papa Smurf looks an awful lot like Karl Marx plus, he wears all that red.

And let us not forget Smurfette, the lone female Smurf and the embodiment of community property.

In the face of such convincing evidence, it is easy to mark the Smurfs as the Socialists they are, and their nemeses Gargamel (and his maladjusted cat Azrael, a not so subtle attack on ISRAEL) is the personification of Capitalism; out for himself and profit trying to destroy the peaceful commune of Smurfs.

Thankfully our resistance was not destroyed, thanks to the determination of other cartoons such as G.I. Joe and Richie Rich who's goal it was to instill in the children of the western world the morals and values of Capitalism.

Re:The Smurfs: Socialist Propaganda (1)

Patrick13 (223909) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709454)

The creator of the Smurfs was Belgian, btw, they weren't created by Hanna Barbera.

As shown in this: fan site [] and the official site [] , you can clearly see that they communal ideal shown in the Smurfs is not Soviet Communism at all, but rather European Socialism.

Okay, then (2, Insightful)

TrumpetPower! (190615) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709367)

The new measures come on top of recently passed security laws, which state that journalists can be prosecuted for criticising Mr Mugabe and his government.

Robert Mugabe, dictator-in-chief of Zimbabwe, is a pusillanimous pipsqueak. His male member is dwarfed in comparison to his cockroach-sized brain. The stench of his breath makes granite crumble. His moral integrity is challenged only by that of a Microsoft lawyer. He rapes newborns with curling irons.

His government is composed entirely of weak-willed wusses, totally incapable of thinking for themselves. This, combined with Mr. Mugabe's stunning intellectual shortcomings, clearly explains the entire fiasco.

Need I continue?


No libel risk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709371)

It's all true!

Re:Okay, then (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709383)

Need I continue? Please do. Don't hold back, please tell it how you think it is.

Re:Okay, then (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709441)

he's a mean one, mr. mugabe. he's a mean one.... presideeeeent of zimboo-ob we! (to the tune of the grinch who stole christmas)

Re:Okay, then (5, Funny)

Servo5678 (468237) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709472)

Dear TrumpetPower!,

You are cordially invited to visit the nation of Zimbabwe on behalf of our glorious government for an all expenses paid vacation. Please contact us immediately to arrange your travel (Oh, and come alone. It's less complicated that way).

Zimbabwe Secret Police

Re:Okay, then (2, Funny)

Prof. Pi (199260) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709550)

His male member is dwarfed in comparison to his cockroach-sized brain. The stench of his breath makes granite crumble. His moral integrity is challenged only by that of a Microsoft lawyer. He rapes newborns with curling irons.

That is simply uncalled for!

I mean really. A Microsoft lawyer???

Not really about internet publishing? (1)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709380)

Meldrum, 50, a US citizen, faces a charge of abusing journalistic privilege, by publishing falsehoods
Does it really matter what laws such countries with questionable legislation say about Internet publishing? If this fails, they'd just make it illegal to publish "lies" outside Zimbabwe too

This is just the beginning (1)

What'sInAName (115383) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709404)

I predict we are going to be seeing more and more of this. As the internet really becomes the primary means of communication for a significant percentage of the world's populace, there will be those (nations, corporations, and even individuals) who will strive to control what is said. I would certainly not be surprised to see wars (or at least 'police actions') fought over what started as basically an internet flame. (Perhaps this has already happened?)

View it as damage. (2)

td (46763) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709420)

The way this problem will ultimately be solved is by routing around it. Zimbabwe and other states of its ilk will find themselves cut off from the internet as customers demand that ISPs not route packets to jurisdictions that may prosecute based on their contents. We already do this for spam. It won't take many convictions before tyrant-blocking black hole lists start to appear and ISPs start marketing them as a feature.

Eventually (but don't hold your breath waiting) these repressive regimes will either bow to internal economic pressure or so impoverish themselves as to lose the means of maintaining their power.

Re:View it as damage. (1)

Gojira Shipi-Taro (465802) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709482)

Hopefully it will work out as you describe.

I can, however, see various bleeding-heart organizations protesting that the poor Zimbabweans (sp?) have been cut off from the internet, placing their children at a disadvantage in the global market /sarcasm(oh won't someone think of the children?) /!sarcasm

Website Licenses (3, Interesting)

Alien54 (180860) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709421)

It is this sort of thing that leads to the sort of Web site licenses seen here: html []

Which, among other things, says :

3.17 You warrant that your access to this site is not a violation of local laws and regulations in force at the location where you are accessing these Web Sites, and You agree to hold harmless these Web Sites, CyberKnowledge, and CyberKnowledge Staff and/or Authorized Agents for any actions by you that may be a violation of such local laws and regulations.

3.18 You warrant that your access to these Web Sites is not a violation of local laws and regulations of the Country, province, state, county, city, town, or any other type of government jurisdiction of which you are a citizen and/or whose laws you are subject to; and You agree to hold harmless these Web Sites, CyberKnowledge, and CyberKnowledge Staff and/or Authorized Agents for any actions by you that may be a violation of such local laws and regulations.


4.15 You warrant that your contribution to these Web Sites is not a violation of local laws and regulations of the Country, province, state, county, city, town, or any other type of government jurisdiction of which you are a citizen and/or whose laws you are subject to; and You agree to hold harmless these Web Sites, CyberKnowledge, and CyberKnowledge Staff and/or Authorized Agents for any actions by you that may be a violation of such local laws and regulations, including obscenity laws as judged by local community standards, promotion of and/or access to child pornography, incitement to illegal acts and/or other crimes not specifically mentioned.

4.16 You warrant that your contribution to this site is not a violation of local laws and regulations in force at the location where you are accessing these Web Sites, and You agree to hold harmless these Web Sites, CyberKnowledge, and CyberKnowledge Staff and/or Authorized Agents for any actions by you that may be a violation of such local laws and regulations, including obscenity laws as judged by local community standards, promotion of and/or access to child pornography, incitement to illegal acts and/or any other crimes not specifically mentioned.

Zimbabwe. Hmmmm. Isn't that where... (2)

PHAEDRU5 (213667) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709426)

...Robert Mugabe hangs out?

You know, murder, rape, and dispossess all the white farmers Robert Mugabe.

And people are surprised by this?!

Imported Bits (4, Funny)

istartedi (132515) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709462)

From now on, perhaps I should put a disclaimer on all my stuff that says:

The following article contains U.S. bits. Be sure to check with your local government(s) before importing the remaining bits. By agreeing to do this, you are assuming liability for compliance with local laws. This agreement also applies to the bits in this agreement, so if you already read the agreement and it is not in compliance with local law, you are SOL not me.

In all seriousness, this could work because the Zimbabwe ISPs would have to check to make sure that the bits were legal for import before importing them, since I can always disclaim that the bits are not intended for export. Faced with such a daunting task, their ISPs would soon shut down.

This seems only fair, since nobody forced them to start an ISP in Zimbabwe anyway.

Ummmmm... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Admin (304403) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709463)

I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you are probably at risk if you go to Zimbabwe, no matter who or what you are.

unless of course you are a nigger (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709474)

support the Ku Klux Klan!!!

In the real world ... (1)

Ashcrow (469400) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709467)

If I stand on the border of a country and say things that are against the law in that bordering country (assuming someone heard me) did I do anything wrong?

I belive the same idea should be used with respect to net law and speech.

Re:In the real world ... (2)

ceejayoz (567949) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709505)

No, but if the guy on the other side of the border shoots you in the head with an AK-47, what're you gonna do about it?

Re:In the real world ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709566)

Have your cute ass wife/girlfrien bust a cap with her far superior H&K MP5-PDW. You know a country/organization/person is "fo-reahl" when they use H&K, anything else is just.... uncivilized.


What did you expect... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709471)

...from such a slimey nigger like Mugabe? This is the exact thing that happens when niggers are allowed to seize power. Clearly the only righteous power is...


Stories like this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709479)

Make me very proud to say that I am a Klansman. I suggest those of you who wish to preserve the white race to please join us and become a fellow Klansman. Thank you and God bless.

This seems crystal clear. (2)

crimoid (27373) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709484)

When someone makes information from a certain locale, the "publisher" is bound by the laws of that locale.

When someone accesses information they are bound by the laws set in the locale from which they are viewing the data.

This is no different than a US publication (local newspaper, for example) being sent to someone in China. The publisher of the US newspaper is bound by US (and State, County, City) law. The person who reads the newspaper in China is bound by Chinese laws.

The fact that the delivery medium is virtually instant shouldn't matter.

Of course all of this is worthless when you're dealing with an unrational, unlogical, totalitarian, arguably evil government.

Re:This seems crystal clear. (2)

mindstrm (20013) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709610)

What if the publisher is distributing the work in China illegally?

Well, the US government can say, "Told ya so" (3, Informative)

Verizon Guy (585358) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709495)

This Public Announcement alerts American citizens to the situation in Zimbabwe following that country's March 2002 presidential election. This Public Announcement supersedes the one issued for Zimbabwe on April 2, 2002, and will expire on August 1, 2002.

U.S. citizens in Zimbabwe should be aware of continuing conditions that could adversely affect their personal security. The political, social, economic, and security situation in Zimbabwe remains fluid. There continue to be incidents of land seizures, police roadblocks, political violence and intimidation in urban, and especially rural areas. The possibility of mass demonstrations cannot be discounted. Growing food shortages and increasing numbers of internally displaced persons have added to social and economic tensions. The Government of Zimbabwe has enacted the Public Order and Security Act, which makes it an offense to "undermine the authority of the President" or "engender hostility" towards him. This includes speaking negatively of the President in public. The bill also bars individuals from speaking negatively of the police and carrying weapons of any kind. The Government has also enacted the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act which, among other things, deals with the abuse of journalistic privilege. Journalists, including Americans, have been detained on charges stemming from this Act.

American citizens should avoid public demonstrations or large gatherings and refrain from taking pictures or videos of political events of any kind. Americans should also monitor the local and international media for developments that may affect their safety. Additionally, American citizens should exercise caution when traveling anywhere in Zimbabwe, should travel with reputable tour operators and are urged to register with the U.S. Embassy, located at 172 Herbert Chitepo Ave., in the capital, Harare, telephone (263)4-250-593/4.

For additional information on travel to Zimbabwe, please consult the Department of State's latest Consular Information Sheet for Zimbabwe, as well as the World Wide Caution Public Announcement, available via the Internet at
Department of State travel information and publications are available at Internet address: U.S. travelers may hear recorded information by calling the Department of State in Washington, D.C. at 202-647-5225 from their touchtone telephone, or receive information by automated telefax by dialing 202-647-3000 from their fax machine.


I tried to highlight the important parts. Point is, Zimbabwe isn't exactly a haven for personal freedoms.

Extradition (3, Insightful)

Joe Decker (3806) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709498)

IIRC, usually extradition only applies for crimes that are recognized as such by both countries. Clearly that would be rarely true in the case of these particular laws.

Simple solution (0, Offtopic)

Pedrito (94783) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709510)

Just one more example of why the U.S. should just nuke all the other countries and let God figure it out. Sure, we'll have a nuclear winter to deal with, but we Americans are a hearty bunch. And sure, it'll make most of the world unliveable, but hey, when the nuclear winter subsides in a few thousand years, there will still be the U.S.

Re:Simple solution Agreed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709578)

hear hear!

Endemic + accelerating problem of communications (3, Insightful)

billstewart (78916) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709512)

This case is yet another symptom of an endemic and accelerating problem of governments' inability to deal with rapid, widespread open communications. Governments' authority and jurisdiction has traditionally been related to geography, and social values, which depend on communications patterns, have also generally cohered around geography - most people only communicate with people "near" them, and they mostly stay put most of the time, though there are major exceptions (emigration, large-scale wars, Vikings, colonizers, and more peaceful traders, Gypsies), but usually there's a strong correlation between governments, societies, and markets, and the kinds of laws governments can enforce are limited by the values of those societies. As communications get out of control, questions of jurisdiction get muddled and the traditional legal structures fail. The internet appears to be at least as disruptive as the cloth and shipping trade in medieval Europe - will it become a purely independent jurisdiction (ala John Perry Barlow's Declaration, or the evolution of commerce law), or some hybrid strongly or loosely subject to local control, and how will we resolve the demands of some people to make the laws equal to the most restrictive laws anywhere and of other people to make them equal to the least restrictive?

Controlling public access to information is a much more resource-effective means of social control than direct military/police action, so it's especially serious for people like Mugabe, but it's a serious problem for governments everywhere. They have enough trouble dealing with effective postal systems and telegraphs, which can often communicate faster than censorship can react, but pre-Internet broadcast media such as traditional newspaper publishing and radio/tv cost enough that most broadcast news is local or at least controllable

  • Newspapers cost enough and carry enough local news that most people read local papers, which can be censored or bullied, and occasional issues of wide-market papers like the NY or London Times or South China Morning Post can have their local distributions squelched for a day if needed
  • Local radio and TV stations have been government-regulated in most jurisdictions, either as government-owned monopolies or at least licensed in ways that control content
  • Short-wave broadcasting had largely been restricted by treaties, and mostly out-competed by television.
  • The growth of satellite television in the last decade or so is a serious threat to government opinion control, but at least it's run by a few big corporations that tend to push hierarchical homogenized values and ignore local issues outside their owners' main markets, so it's a slower-moving threat that it could be - the real impact is often on cultural and economic values rather than directly rocking the boat.
But the Internet is just there - once you've got it, you've got access to everything and tools for finding the things you want, and language differences may fragment it somewhat, but not only does much of the world speak English, Chinese, Spanish, or French, but the expatriates that you most wish would stay away and leave you alone now have a much easier time reaching your subjects, speak your local languages, and care about your local issues.

Even in more liberal countries that don't have vicious totalitarian-wannabee governments, the Internet is still disruptive to the cultural status-quo and sometimes to the government. Back during one of the Internet-rumormongering flaps (I forget if it was a Matt Drudge thing or a Who Shot Down TWA Flight 800 or some conspiracy thing), somebody asked Esther Dyson about the Internet encouraging this sort of thing, and she said that yes, it did, but that television was better for propaganda. We've seen a lot of resistance to Internet openness focused on cultural-value conflicts like pornography. In some places like the US, the issue might really *be* concern about pornography (e.g. Ashcroft covering up naked statues), but it's being used by other governments as an excuse to grab control of the Internet distribution before it totally gets out of hand - the Great Firewall of China and similar efforts are doomed in the long run, but it's about the only thing they can do if they want to keep any control over the information their people see.

We need a cyber-jurisdiction (3, Insightful)

NewtonsLaw (409638) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709529)

I've been saying this for many years but nobody really seems to listen...

Governments of the world need to wake up and realize that cyberspace (I hate that word) is just as real as the USA, Britain, Australia or any other country on the face of the planet.

What's needed are some "cyberspace treaties" that would work in much the same way as the various treaties that cover issues such as copyright, trademarks, patents, etc.

These treaties need only lay down the basic framework of laws needed to restrict users actions and preserve their rights while in "cyberspace."

If a country's right to connect to the Net was conditional on signing to such an treaty then we'd have a method of producing and enforcing consistent laws related to the Net and its (ab)use.

Stomping on spam would be a great start -- imagine if there were a set of basic anti-spamming laws to which all Net-connected countries had to agree to be bound (under threat of excommunication). When you got a spam from Korea -- you report the offense and if the Korean authorities were found to not be enforcing the law, they'd be in jeopardy of having the entire country disconnected.

Other important issues such as kiddy porn, defamation, etc could also be covered by such a treaty -- making it far easier to track down and arrest or extradite offenders.

Hey... the RIAA and MPAA seem to have been able to unofficially create just such a global network of enforcement -- so why can't the world's authorities and legislators watch and learn.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very much opposed to the introduction of bureaucracy and regulation in respect to Internet use. However, I'm also a realist and I acknowledge that there are some areas (kiddy-porn, spamming, etc) where we simply have to do something because not to act is to endorse the action of those who choose to spoil the Net for everyone.

There are US precedents for this (1)

Prof. Pi (199260) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709531)

Alan Dershowitz, in his book The Best Defense, describes a case where the male star of Deep Throat (a porn flick) was charged in Tennessee of participating in a conspiracy to violate Tennessee obscenity laws through his role as actor, even though the film was shot elsewhere and he had no control over the distribution of the film to Tennessee. (Seems the Attorney General there was an anti-porn zealot who figured it was easier to charge powerless actors than studios with money.)

(On a side note, tells of another case where a porn distributor in Manhattan was charged with violating federal obscenity laws because they shipped a movie to Albany (also in New York). The "interstate commerce" clause was invoked on the grounds that the shipping company normally took the Holland Tunnel out of Manhattan, and thus were temporarily in New Jersey. Dershowitz defended the client by showing that the company sometimes used an alternate route if traffic was bad, a route confined to New York. The government couldn't prove the shipper had taken the normal route on the day in question.

First Jon (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3709543)

Jon Barrett [] says hi~! While SPOOGING for the Queen of Spain. Also, Linux suxorz.

Solution: Recycle! (1)

rice_burners_suck (243660) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709557)

This is unacceptable! There is no excuse for any government or entity in power in any country or state in the world for prosecuting anybody for publishing anything! There should be an international law that guarentees every person's rights throughout the world as stated in the original Constitution of the united States, taking into consideration the years of experiences gained by millions of Americans who have given equal rights to women, blacks, and anybody else for that matter. In other words, the ideas of our forefathers should be applied to everywhere in the world. I think all the people of the world should be horrified by this criminal act on the part of Zimbabwe's government, and we should all write a hundred letters a day in protest, and mail them all to Zimbabwe's offices. The next thing you know, Zimbabwe becomes the world's leading supplier of recycled paper, and they'll be so busy doing that, they won't have time to prosecute anybody anymore.

Oooooooooooooh well.

Zimbabwe's problem, not UK's (2)

Sean Clifford (322444) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709567)

If you're an opressive regime and don't want your citizens reading UK rags, filter them. It's Zimbabwe's problem, not the UK's.

Possession is 9/10th's of the law anyway, so where the server resides governs.

everybody does it (5, Insightful)

g4dget (579145) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709594)

The US tries hard to impose its draconian laws in areas like computer security, child pornography, and copyrights on other countries. The US assists police in foreign countries with raids on their citizens, detains visitors to the US (viz the Adobe case), and seizes assets. And the UK (libel) and Germany (Nazi hate speech) are trying to do the same thing.

Given what restrictions powerful nations like the US, the UK, and Germany are trying to impose on speech in other countries, they really don't have any reason to complain when other countries try to do this as well. What they can do and should do is criticize is Mugabe, his regime, and his policies, independent of how those policies spill over into the Interne.

Common Sense or Visual Basic (1)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 12 years ago | (#3709608)

If a country has a problem with certain substances, it can stop them (i.e filter) at the border with customs officials. If it has problems with data, it can filter that too (a firewall/proxy). Neither is fool-proof, especially with data.

If a country decides that someone has committed a crime, and if that person is in, or visits the country they can be arrested. If you are a reporter, programmer, or anyone else that does something to piss off another country that you don't agree with, don't go there. Its just common sense. If you do get arrested, just pray that your home country eg UK, America etc will bomb the shit out of the other country to get you back. This probably won't happen since it was your fault to begin with.

I can just see someone coming up with a (Visual Basic) program, you select the country that you've pissed off, and select the country that you want to visit, and it will tell you if your safe, or if you'll have an extradition treaty up your ass :) As an extra feature, it also predicts the chances of your home country coming to the rescue and nuking everyone to save you (if home-country=USA then nuking-weight=x100) lol
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>