Beta
×

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!

Thailand Sues YouTube

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 7 years ago | from the let's-all-take-off-our-left-shoe dept.

Google 435

eldavojohn writes "Thailand is hitting YouTube with charges of lese majeste (up to 15 years in prison) regarding the recent videos on YouTube showing the king next to feet, something extremely offensive in Thailand. 'Since the first clip, more new videos mocking the king have appeared on YouTube, including pictures of the monarch that had been digitally altered to make him resemble a monkey. Thailand's 79-year-old king, almost universally adored by Thais, is the world's longest-reigning monarch, and one of the few who is still protected by tough laws that prohibit any insult against the royal family.'"

cancel ×

435 comments

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

"loved by all" (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19024821)

Thailand's 79-year-old king, almost universally adored by Thais, is the world's longest-reigning monarch, and one of the few who is still protected by tough laws that prohibit any insult against the royal family
Nearly every story I see on this subject restates this 'fact'. One should keep in mind that many dictators have had this sort of law in place, and it does seem to work. That is until the law is ended, and people are free to speak their mind. Sure some will maintain their support, if only because of how they were raised. Of course as many of them see nothing wrong with selling their daughters into prostitution (and often AIDS) [msmagazine.com] ...

...including pictures of the monarch that had been digitally altered to make him resemble a monkey

Perhaps instead they should photo-shop him into the pictures of the child prostitutes for which his country is infamous (not X-rated would get the most press, just standing among the lineups, and next to the AIDS ridden ones who are dying would be appropriate). Maybe his loving subjects might reconsider selling their daughters into a life of misery.

posted AC as I am a coward, more reading on the king and Thailand [speroforum.com]

Re:"loved by all" (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024985)

Reminds me of queues chinese wore under the manchus. A mark of respect or a mark of submission?

Re:"loved by all" (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19024993)

> his loving subjects might reconsider selling their daughters into a life of misery.

That happens for economic reasons, though with the consent of Thai law enforcement. A significant percentage of the country's GDP comes from sex tourism and such. Large differences in economic status, absolute poverty...

Women and children are sold as slaves in the US, too, or from the US; it's less common to be trafficked from here to another country, because usually the flow of slaves for labor or forced prostitution runs from poorer countries to richer, while the money goes the other way. (Thailand, Russia and former Societ Bloc States, Nepal, Brazil, Nigeria... there are a lot of source countries for slaves.) Destination countries include the US, Canada, India, the UK, Italy, Germany, the UAE, Israel, South Korea, etc...

Royal Family (4, Funny)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024829)

Can suck my toe..

Now, sue me. Just try it. In *my* country i can say this, so go away.

Re:Royal Family (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19024883)

Two word: extradition treaties

Re:Royal Family (1)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024937)

Lucky for us, that only works when you brake US laws... not so lucky for everyone else that it works at all.

Re:Royal Family (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025073)

"Brake" a law, huh? How about "steering wheel" a law, or "exhaust" a law, or even "manual transmission" a law?

Re:Royal Family (2, Funny)

compro01 (777531) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025155)

well, a number of laws have exhausted their purpose...

MOD PARENT UP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025185)

help fight illiteracy on the internet!

Re:Royal Family (1)

brunascle (994197) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024957)

IANAL, but since when does me doing something in my country that would have been illegal had i done it in your country warrant my extradition to your country? it's not like google is Thai.

Well, (1, Flamebait)

joe 155 (937621) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025123)

well there is increasing precedent for this... Gary McKinnon broke a law in his country and yet faces extradition to another he has was not in - might be applicable. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_McKinnon [wikipedia.org]

And its not just the UK, Australia has got in on the act... http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/07/01 44241 [slashdot.org]

People already get grabbed for doing things which are not considered serious crimes (lets not forget saying the king is a monkey might be slander in the US) to countries where they will face manifestly severe punishments... This just seems like an extension of this new world order.

Re:Well, (5, Informative)

gravesb (967413) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025399)

Its amazing how many people don't understand how this works. There is a treaty, of which the United States, GB, and Australia are all signatories, that creates certain baselines for cybercrime. Since the treaty process was started by the Council of Europe, its rather disingenious to blame all of the resulting statutory implementations on the US. Yes, we did have a large part in the writing, but we were not the only ones who did, and the statutes that each country wrote as a result were their own doing. Yes, the US doesn't always play well with others (WTO, anyone), but the cybercrime treaty is good law, and in accordance with traditional common law principles. If you stand in Canada, and shoot a man in Michigan, you can be extradited to Michigan, if Canada decides that's the most effective method. Same thing here. If you hack a US server, even if you are in the UK, the UK can send you to the US for trial. Jurisdiction is commonly based on the effect of the crime, not just the origin. In this case, I doubt there is an applicable treaty, as the US Supreme Court would frown on restrictions of parody, and likely strike down Congressional implementation of any statute. Likewise, the Thai government could attempt a civil suit in US court, but I doubt that is going to carry much weight. Its also perfectly acceptable for Thailand to ban YouTube from doing business in Thailand absent a representative in Thailand for just this purpose, but if YouTube merely posts the videos, and Thais come to the videos, it will be difficult for Thailand to respond.

Re:Well, (1)

Stile 65 (722451) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025445)

I highly doubt that saying "X is a monkey" is slander. Insults aren't slander, and nobody will be convinced that X is literally a monkey. Hell, have you seen Bush or Chimp? [bushorchimp.com]

Monarchies are useless in the modern world, and this is yet another shining example of why. The funny thing is, the king in Thailand seems to like to pardon people (or at least foreigners) that do this, according to TFA.

Public Policy Exception (2, Informative)

ubuwalker31 (1009137) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025547)

I do not think that anyone in a Western Style democracy will be handed over to the Thai authorities to be prosecuted for this type of thought crime, because it goes against numerous public policies, such as freedom of speech. Egad, the USA was founded on the concept of being able to criticize and make fun of royalty.

I am surprised that the usual smart people on slashdot can't get their heads around the concept that "physical presence" in a country is only one of many ways to subject yourselves to that countries laws. Doing business with a country's citizens, through the mail or over the telephone, or over the internet is enough of a contact. And even if there are extensive contacts, there are very strong overriding public policies which would prohibit such an extradition.

That being said, If I was a YouTube executive or employee, I wouldn't travel to Thailand, because then they could arrest you physically there, and there would be very little that your government could do about your prosecution.

Re:Royal Family (4, Insightful)

jimstapleton (999106) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025017)

They only have a chance of that if YouTube has servers in Thailand

Re:Royal Family (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025335)

They only have a chance of that if YouTube has servers in Thailand

You'd think so, but that's not always true [slashdot.org] .

Re:Royal Family (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025161)

You know, you may say that now, but I don't think you'd be laughing so hard if a bunch of Chinese sitizens publicly burned depictions of Jesus or showed Him in a less than flattering light.

Re:Royal Family (1)

jeffasselin (566598) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025311)

What if he's an atheist?

And in any way, I'm gonna agree with Voltaire here: I don't like what you're saying, but I'll defend your right to say it with my life.

Re:Royal Family (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025271)

Yeah, you tell it to them. [slashdot.org]

vacations cancelled (2, Funny)

BamZyth (940235) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025369)

Damn I work at google and traveling there was the only way I could get sex.

Re:Royal Family (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025421)

so go away.

You Thai pig-dogs, or I shall taunt you a second time!

Universally adored? (4, Insightful)

The Warlock (701535) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024833)

If he's universally adored, then why are people making fun of him on the Internet?

Or is he universally adored in Thailand because it's illegal not to?

(Damn, I wish I could have people thrown in prison for making fun of me on the Internet. Wow.)

look everyone, someone wrestling with basic logic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025029)

Because those people are minority Thais or aren't Thais? In TFA they're talking about a Swiss man.

The complete quote was "almost universally adored by Thais"

Re:Universally adored? (4, Insightful)

FooBarWidget (556006) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025327)

It may very well be that 99% of the Thai sincerely adore the king, but that only 1% want to mock him. The existence of such laws do not necessarily imply that people are forced to like the king.

Re:Universally adored? (2, Insightful)

Fred Ferrigno (122319) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025461)

Not that I know anything at all about the king or the political situation in Thailand, but maybe more people would oppose him if it wasn't illegal to tell them why they should.

Applaud (5, Funny)

leoPetr (926753) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024839)

LeoPetr, almost universally revered by Thai Slashdotters, makes an incisive and witty comment on the situation.

Hrm... (4, Funny)

laddy (159448) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024851)

Thailand's 79-year-old king, almost universally adored by Thais, is the world's longest-reigning monarch, and one of the few who is still protected by tough laws that prohibit any insult against the royal family.'
 
Hrm...

Re:Hrm... (4, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025127)

Imagine this for the British Royals! Teh horror! What would the yellow press do?

No more Duke of Ears jokes, no more Hakenkreuz-Harry, no "why can't Camilla ride a horse" jokes... the world would be poorer ... or better off.

Re:Hrm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025211)

Not being from, or ever having visited the UK, why can't Camilla ride a horse?

Re:Hrm... (2, Informative)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025379)

Because the horse would have a hard time figuring out whether she's to mount him or he's to mount her.

It helps to know what she looks like [t-online.ch] .

Re:Hrm... (2, Interesting)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025189)

Is he almost universally adored by all Thais, or just the ones who aren't in jail?

Re:Hrm... (5, Informative)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025389)

Thailand's 79-year-old king, almost universally adored by Thais, is the world's longest-reigning monarch, and one of the few who is still protected by tough laws that prohibit any insult against the royal family.'


And this, my friends, is why we we have the 1st Amendment to the Constitution in the U.S. ... to protect offensive speech. Because offensive speech (particularly involving the monarch) was punishable by imprisonment in Imperial England.

Your lesson in American History and Civics brought to you today by the King of Thailand -- Universally Adored by Thais everywhere!

What's so funny? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025403)

The king is so adored by Thais that it would be heartbreaking for them to see any insult to their king, hence the law.

Ok so what would be a parallel to Western people? Almost everyone likes to see clean highway exchanges, hence laws against graffiti. Would you say "why do we need anti-graffiti laws since almost everyone prefers clean concrete structures?" Well obviously, because a minority can ruin it for everybody, and this is even though graffiti don't even harm the functionality of the structure.

In both cases (king and graffiti) the respective law is just there to protect people from seeing unpleasant things.

Re:What's so funny? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025503)

You assume the law was made to protect the sensitive feelings of Thais. It was probably enacted because of the same stupid reason we have flag burning laws - people are so brainwashed in "patriotism" they don't pause to consider what the law being passed really means to their rights.

I was taught (and it never hurts to repeat this) that the Bill of Rights was written "to protect the minority from the majority". We can be thankful for the Bill of Rights - if we can keep fascists in our goverment (and sadly ignorant supports of same) from whittling them away. The Thai people might consider this, too.

oooh! Witty comeback! (1)

UbuntuDupe (970646) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024873)

How about ditching the "lese majeste", and trying some "laissez faire"?

Re:oooh! Witty comeback! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025171)

Touché!

Here we go again (4, Insightful)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024891)

While there may be laws in Thailand against such pictures, there are none in most of the rest of the world. King or not, you cannot regulate the entire network. Perhaps by law, YouTube must remove such offending pictures in their Thailand based servers, but if anyone, I mean ANYONE thinks they can regulate the entire Internet... they are in for a surprise.

In fact, since this story has come out in the open now, you are sure to see even more pictures of the king in all sorts of not-so-pleasant-for-him ways.

I guess they have to try until they learn....

Queue the viral news stories with funny pictures of the king in 3... 2... 1..

Re:Here we go again (4, Informative)

ruiner13 (527499) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025537)

You mean how the US made online gambling illegal? Or is trying to push to make AllOfMp3.com illegal? Seems like other countries are doing this too.

So where are the links? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19024895)

Come on? First you tease with this long summary to several good Youtube clips and then you omit all the links?

The government of Thailand (2, Interesting)

WombatDeath (681651) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024901)

...doesn't sound very bright. Or, more likely, they're perfectly bright and it's me that's stupid. Given that they have no grounds on which to sue anyone and that they're no doubt perfectly aware of that, what's the plan?

I would assume that it's a move to appease an outraged populace, except that the populace don't appear to be too outraged and the government's going to look rather foolish and impotent when they fail to accomplish anything.

Kings have been doing this for a while. (2, Interesting)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025201)

Xerxes flew into a rage at this, and he commanded that the Hellespont be struck with three hundred strokes of the whip and that a pair of foot-chains be thrown into the sea. ... He also commanded the scourgers to speak outlandish and arrogant words: "You hateful water, our master lays his judgment on you thus, for you have unjustly punished him even though he's done you no wrong! Xerxes the king will pass over you, whether you wish it or not! It is fitting that no man offer you sacrifices, for you're a muddy and salty river!" In these ways he commanded that the sea be punished...

Re:The government of Thailand (1)

naapo (982524) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025347)

I would assume they're planning to sue in Thailand, not in the USA. There seems to be a law in Thailand with heavy penalties for insulting the king. If YouTube/Google has any subsidiaries in Thailand, they may be screwed.

Youtube didn't make the videos... (1)

Saint V Flux (915378) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024909)

someone who doesn't like the king did (and it's probably safe to assume they're Thai). I'll be extremely shocked if this goes anywhere at all.

Universally adored, eh? (1, Redundant)

Reason58 (775044) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024915)

Thailand's 79-year-old king, almost universally adored by Thais, is the world's longest-reigning monarch, and one of the few who is still protected by tough laws that prohibit any insult against the royal family.

If he was universally adored then such laws would be unnecessary.

Re:Universally adored, eh? (1)

pbhj (607776) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025059)

>>> "If he was universally adored then such laws would be unnecessary." ... and hence why it says _almost_.

almost => there exists someone who doesn't adore the king

note: lack of existential operators inhibited the workings of this post!

Re:Universally adored, eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025531)

almost someone who doesn't adore the king

You tube should plead guilty! (5, Funny)

physicsphairy (720718) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024923)

Thailand is hitting YouTube with charges of lese majeste (up to 15 years in prison)
YouTube should plead guilty and accept their 15 year prison sentence.

Take that you abstract embodiment of an American corporational contract owned by another abstract entity also with no definite personification! It's off to the pokey!

Nice... (2, Informative)

Moridineas (213502) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024943)

"Thailand's 79-year-old king, almost universally adored by Thais"
To paraphrase the Simpsons, this story was brought to you by one B. Adulyadej. No no, that's too obvious, let's say Bhumibol A. [wikipedia.org]

Man (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19024949)

And here I was thinking that Asia was a bastion of civil rights and freedom. You learn something new every day!

15 years (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19024955)

Next month, a "random" YouTube user will be selected for a 15-year vacation in beautiful Thailand!

Why do I get the image (4, Interesting)

tkrotchko (124118) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024959)

Why do I get the image of a server sitting in the pokey in Thailand?

No seriously...

Do people think Google officials should be sent to Thailand on extradition the way Australia sent alleged copyright criminals to the United States? Is this the same situation, or is it fundamentally different?

Re:Why do I get the image (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025397)

Do people think Google officials should be sent to Thailand on extradition the way Australia sent alleged copyright criminals to the United States? Is this the same situation, or is it fundamentally different?
It is the same situation. Fry the Google criminals.

Re:Why do I get the image (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025483)

Is this the same situation, or is it fundamentally different?

Fundamentally different: this would involve extradition from America.

Um.... (5, Insightful)

Roachgod (589171) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024963)

Get the fuck over it. Seriously.

He is a KING. A KING. He should be able to deal with (oh horror) FEET!. I am aware of the cultural implications (I am friends with a few people from Thailand), but I expect people to be able to get over jackasses giving them the finger. I expect more of a guy who is a king.

The laws are lame. Tough shit Thailand.

Re:Um.... (4, Funny)

Donniedarkness (895066) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025057)

Agreed. You made me wish I had mod points.

He's a king; if he can lead the country, surely he can withstand...FEET. I understand that feet are treated differently over there.... but well, if someone posted a picture of me next to a bare penis (or hell, even a BEAR penis), I don't think I'd be trying to sue them--it's the internet. Nobody cares.

Re:Um.... (4, Funny)

ErikZ (55491) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025237)

Correction, nobody cares about you.

Re:Um.... (4, Insightful)

secolactico (519805) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025307)

He is a KING. A KING. He should be able to deal with (oh horror) FEET!. I am aware of the cultural implications (I am friends with a few people from Thailand), but I expect people to be able to get over jackasses giving them the finger. I expect more of a guy who is a king.

I'm thinking that it's not the King who wants to sue, but some officials who feel insulted or wants to ingratiate themselves or whatever. Remember that Thailand is under military rule and the monarch is just the "head of state".

In fact, it was the king who pardoned the swiss man who defaced his portrait. For all we know the king doesn't give a hoot about this issue but it's not in his power to change the law or to keep people from trying to enforce it.

In any case, I don't think this will amount to anything. I think they just want their displeasure to be heard but they are fully aware that a lawsuit of this kind will not do a thing.

Re:Um.... (0, Troll)

dave_boo (1089337) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025381)

And you're a slashdotter.....should you be able to stand me coming over and shitting in your mouth? To Thais, it's the same level of disrespect.

Re:Um.... (1)

brunascle (994197) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025475)

in this instance, it's not so much about the disrespect as much as the fact that there's shit in my mouth and it's your fault. i think it'd be closer to spitting at my feet, or flipping me off.

Trick or Treat (1)

darkrowan (976992) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024967)

Smell my Feet?
/Offtopic, yes, but the first thing that came to mind

Re:Trick or Treat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025153)

go back to fark.com (:

What goes around... (4, Interesting)

d34thm0nk3y (653414) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024977)

Well, if Australians can be charged with breaking the DMCA then Americans should be able to be charged with breaking lese majeste.

Re:What goes around... (2, Informative)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025119)

Well, if Australians can be charged with breaking the DMCA then Americans should be able to be charged with breaking lese majeste.

The difference here, is that the US pressured every trading partner to make their absurd DMCA law apply to everyone else on the planet.

The US, on the other hand, has never signed up to participate with anyone else's laws except those they championed in the first place.

However, the French have managed to ensure that Yahoo, E-bay, etc aren't allowing anything to do with Nazi paraphernalia to enter their country. So, at a minimum, they might be forced to block such stuff in Thailand.

Cheers

Re:What goes around... (1)

d34thm0nk3y (653414) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025321)

The difference here, is that the US pressured every trading partner to make their absurd DMCA law apply to everyone else on the planet.

So they should probably prosecute the Australian in an Australian court under the Australian version of the DMCA then huh?

Re:What goes around... (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025353)

So they should probably prosecute the Australian in an Australian court under the Australian version of the DMCA then huh?

That, I would agree with totally. That particular extradition just seems odd to me. Australia got their own version of the DMCA foisted on them as AFAIK.

Cheers

Re:What goes around... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025345)

However, the French have managed to ensure that Yahoo, E-bay, etc aren't allowing anything to do with Nazi paraphernalia to enter their country.

I was about to post that you can't sell NAZI stuff on eBay, but before I opened my yap, I did a search with "NAZI" in may Firefox search box with the eBay engine selected, and a shit load of stuff showed up. Good thing I searched!

So, I'll go to argument #2, and that is, what, the French don't want to recognize their own history?

Most countries bend over backwards to show how they were victimized by the NAZIs.

Re:What goes around... (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025451)

So, I'll go to argument #2, and that is, what, the French don't want to recognize their own history?

Most countries bend over backwards to show how they were victimized by the NAZIs.

I think France's banning of such things is to prevent people who might agree with the Nazis from having access to such materials. I don't think it's even remotely about NOT wanting to recognize their history -- it's more about trying to ensure people in the here-and-now aren't buying a bunch of Nazi artifacts.

I don't think France is collectively acting like that whole Nazi occupation never happened. They just don't want to foster a bunch of people marching up and down the square in old uniforms and banners.

However, someone who is more informed on the topic can feel free to expand on that.

Cheers

Protected by law?! (1)

Wandering Wombat (531833) | more than 7 years ago | (#19024981)

one of the few who is still protected by tough laws that prohibit any insult against the royal family.'" Seems sort of a frivolous thing to protect with a law. "Don't say bad things about me, or I'll throw you in jail!" Seriously...

"Oh, no, there's a video of me that doesn't harm me in any way whatsoever, and gives pleasure to thousands! This must be STOPPED! Someone get my underage prostitutes to hire some lawyers to sue those people in a foreign country who's opinions I care nothing for!"

Re:Protected by law?! (4, Interesting)

EraseEraseMe (167638) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025247)

The king himself actually cares very little for this kind of attention and has suggested publically that the government uses this law to silence dissenters more than anything else. He usually pardons them in his yearly pardon-athon.

Simple, Don't take the party plane near Thailand. (2, Interesting)

phorest (877315) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025003)

*ADVICE*

Next time you want real Thai food, go to the corner emigre's restaurant instead, yes I know it's so much fun to fill up the party plane and jet on over, but seriously, you'll get to enjoy your freedom...

*FUN FACT*
Did you know that the word Thai means "Freedom"?

here we go again... (1)

Ayal.Rosenthal (1070472) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025007)

This is just like when Turkey blocked YouTube after complaints that some videos insulted Ataturk. It took two whole days before they had to back down. Since Thailand is under military rule right now, I give the country an additional day bonus for despotism and believe that they'll keep YouTube annoyed for three days.

Err... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025025)

How can a website go to jail?

The King of Siam (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025027)

I was stationed in Thailand from August 1973 to August 1974 when I was in the Air Force. The Thais are the friendliest people you would ever hope to meet.

Mars couldn't have been a stranger place than Thailand. I can't stress enough the difference between there and the west. Everything is different; even the color of the dirt is different. All of their customs are different. Flipping the bird means nothing, but don't point your foot at anyone!

Just don't piss them off. I once had a fellow point a .45 caliber pistol at me because I didn't want to drink any Thai whiskey, and was told that this was a grave insult. I apologized and drank the whiskey, and we all had a great time.

The king's picture is on their money. Once I dropped a dollar, an American dollar, fortunately, and they were a bit shaken when I stepped on it to keep it from blowing away. If it had been a bhat (a currency in both coin and paper that was worth a nickle at the time) I'd have gotten a severe beating and maybe been killed.

I once saw a kickboxing match between Thail boxers and Chinese Gung-Fu fighters. The Gung-Fu guys wound up going to the hospital.

They're short, but don't fuck with the Thais. They're likely to extradite all you gonzos [slashdot.org] now that precidence is set and put your young asses in a Thai jail.

A friend of mine wound up in a Thai jail. If you don't have friends or family bring you food, you starve! Boy, are you kids in deep doodoo!

-mcgrew

OP, RTFA. (5, Informative)

Samurai Cat! (15315) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025037)

Submitted title: "Thailand *sues* YouTube"

Actual article title: "Thailand *to sue* YouTube over king clips"

First line in article: "We are *considering* taking legal action against the website," said Vissanu Meeyo, a spokesman for the information ministry."

Teeensy bit of difference, there.

Expression (2, Insightful)

kaleco (801384) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025045)

Thailand's 79-year-old king, almost universally adored by Thais, is the world's longest-reigning monarch, and one of the few who is still protected by tough laws that prohibit any insult against the royal family

Maybe there is a relationship between this universal adoration and the tough laws that prevent Thais from expressing opinions to the contrary.

It must suck to be a Thai with a foot fetish (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025051)

The great thing about having a foot fetish is that, unlike with other traditionally revered body parts, women will lay their toes and soles bare at all times in all places. In the West, anyway. In summer, it's like being surrounded by bewbs wherever you go.

NOW we might finally get an answer! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025079)

I've been pondering this since Sony launched that trojan, something that a kid was arrested for: How you do imprison a corporation?

Re:NOW we might finally get an answer! (1)

ErikZ (55491) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025183)


Since you can't, you'll just have to fine it huge sums of money.

Hey, isn't Youtube owned by Google now? How convenient.

as the dmca number fiasco demonstrated (4, Interesting)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025087)

when you attempt to censor something, anything, you just give whatever it is free advertising

i'm glad the thais love their king. but if they are secure in their love for their king, the existence of these videos won't mean anything to them. by freaking out at the existence of these videos, they only demonstrate insecurity on their part, and they cheapen and devalue their love for their king

same when deeply religious people freak out at some sort of sacriledge. with dignity and ignoring the sacriledge, they show the depth of their love, by turning into ravenous dogs, they only denigrate their faith, such as with devout muslims and pictures of muhammad, or devout catholics and depicitions of the virgin mary

if your faith or love is storng, idiots and childish pranks don't move you. if it does move you, it only shows your love or faith is cheap and shallow and insecure

Re:as the dmca number fiasco demonstrated (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025413)

Cue the Liberty Bell March and the Monty Python foot...

Not sure what the king has to worry about (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025089)

GWBush was depicted as a monkey and that never hurt his ratings.... oh, wait, nevermind

Re:Not sure what the king has to worry about (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025467)

I think being depicted as a monkey didn't hurt him as much as acting like one.

Its the YouTube sys admins I feel sorry for (1)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025167)

15 years in Thai slammer looking after the convicted servers.....bummer

Mocking the Royal Family (2, Informative)

zoomshorts (137587) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025223)

This is the worst thing to do. Despite the kingdom being a constitutional monarchy,
King Bhumibol is a great person. I met him in the 1969 timeframe, my father was a
military advisor. His Majesty is both humble and knowledgeable. He was born in the
U.S.. He loves his people, as do the entire family.

IF anyone needed to have a constitutional monarch, you would be hard pressed to find
a better one !!!!! These are quality people. ignore the military, they take turns
running the country.

09f9 effect? (1)

davidwr (791652) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025225)

UNWIRED NEWS 9 April 2007:
After attempting to block them, DIIG administrators finally relented to a user revolt and are now allowing links to videos of the King of Tieland next to feet, "legal consequences be damned." The videos were first posted to YouTuub but after a threat of legal action by the Tie government they spread around the world. Earlier this morning, a Google search showed approximately 790135794162121871174506300771 hits for the phrase "Tieland king feet."

Slashdotter Replies (1)

Ian McBeth (862517) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025245)

And here I thought Slashdotter's were a bunch of love, peace, and compassion liberal types.
The bottom of the foot in Thailand is just as offensive as a Mohamed Cartoon is to Muslims,
or a Statue of Jesus made of feces is to Christians.

The laws against doing this to the King, are enforced.
The cops in Thailand don't have to come looking for you either,
The people will turn you in, for stepping on a Coin with the Kings image on it.

Frankly, if the persons doing this become known, they should expect assassination.
Doing this is stupid, and it is obviously being done by a non-Thai.

What happened to respecting other peoples cultures and religious beliefs anyway?

Well, I think it's true enough they love him (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025297)

I lived in Thailand for 2 years, knew many Thais, had a Thai gf etc, and I have to say that from what I could see they really do love him - or act very convincingly that they do. One of the greatest faux pas I made there was making a slightly joking comment about him .. the look of horror on their faces was memorable, and I sure didn't do that again.

You can say that they only "love" him because they've been constantly indoctrinated from childhood to do so, and you'd probably be right, but the result as I saw it is pretty much the same. Even in a bar full of drunk partygoers at 3 in the morning on Sukhumvit Rd (a high-foreigner area) - a good way to make everyone within earshot hate you, and possibly physically attack you, is to badmouth the king in any way, shape or form.

Good? Bad? I don't know, but from my experience, whether it's programmed or not, yup - they pretty much universally adore him.

I'll get this in (4, Informative)

dave_boo (1089337) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025299)

before there's too many idiots reguritating their nonsensical rhetoric concerning Thailand.

I'm a resident of Thailand, let's get that out of the way right now.

Firstly, all those who insist that the lese majeste laws are there because the majority of Thais would suddenly rise up and start doing what those without respect for anything would do are seriously disillusioned. And/or they've never traveled to Thailand. There's a deep reverence for the King here which arises from all that he has done. The fact that he has mostly remained out of politics has been a bonus, but the attention that he pays to his people weighs significantly in his favour. And the link that another poster put in that suggest that he had a personal dislike for Thaskin, and that is what forced him out of the country is laughable. As anyone who follows the politics knows, the situation had been brewing for quite some time. The fact that Thaskin was guilty of doing exactly what people hate Bush Inc for is conveniently either glossed over or omitted.

And to the inevitable "What do you expect from a country of pedophiles?" comments: There's absolutely nothing of the sort in your country?

Re:I'll get this in (2, Interesting)

dave_boo (1089337) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025465)

Something I forgot to mention: You'll notice that most of these instances involve foreigners. Like that Swiss man? He lived here 10 years, got pissed because he couldn't buy beer on the King's birthday, and you would think knowing better, decided to deface the King's picture on HIS BIRTHDAY. And yet the King pardoned him (although he's now a Personna non Grata).

What the heck is going on? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025333)

I've seen alot of people say "Hahaha 15 years, like that could put anyone in prison, there's no one there to PUT in prison" Maybe not, but just because there is a maximum sentence of 15 years, doesn't mean they put everyone they charge with this crime in prison for 15 years. Its a maximum penalty people! You are all acting so dim, what's going to happen is something along the lines of: they will charge youtube in their absence, come to the conclusion they are guilty and then just either completely block youtube, or require them to block offending clips. You know, sometimes I get the idea /. is somewhat intelligent, but thankfully comments like those bring me back down to earth with a thud.

Well, this will quietly eliminate the mocking. (4, Insightful)

Baavgai (598847) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025355)

A few people post an insult, they show it to their friends, they all get a laugh. You find this horribly offensive, what do you do?

A) While the number aware of the offending material is still few, you can choose to just let it go.

Or...

B) You sue one of the largest Internet entities around, assuring that your embarrassment will achieve far reaching exposure previously impossible. People who don't even know where your country is (i.e. Americans ) will mock you and, if you're real lucky, late night TV hosts will broadcast the images so that even those who don't know YouTube from BoobTube can share in your mortification.

You choose B? Really? Good luck with that.

Re:Well, this will quietly eliminate the mocking. (1)

Z0mb1eman (629653) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025529)

Hey, it worked for Digg!

Freedom of speech is more important than your king (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025517)

And you should all get that. other parts of the world do not have to live by thai traditions, or any other tradition in any other country.

unfortunately i dont care for your king, for example, and i side with youtube on that matter.

This story is useless without pictures. (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025519)

I want to see the monkey king near feet.

BTW., if I had a law that could be used to throw anyone, who doesn't adore me into jail, I also would be universally adored.

photomosiac (4, Funny)

Chutzpah (6677) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025527)

They could have ignored it, but now its going to be a matter of days before makes a photo mosiac [wikipedia.org] of the king of Thialand made up entirely of pictures of feet.

Ah the daily google got sued post (1)

pavera (320634) | more than 7 years ago | (#19025545)

Seriously though, do you thing the folks at Google thought they'd get sued almost daily for you tube? I wonder who has to serve the 15 years?

I figured there would be a couple lawsuits, but this is getting a little bizarre. Google will be paying out the nose for years for these lawsuits, there is no way this is worth it.

Google has more money than Thailand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19025555)

Thailand is a corrupt shit hole where criminals and sexual deviants go to enjoy themselves. Somehow I don't think the US is going to take those charges seriously. Lets go post insults about his feet on Digg.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?