Thailand Sues YouTube 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.'"
"loved by all" (Score:5, Informative)
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]
right... (Score:5, Insightful)
In fact, it has nothing to do with it.
Re:"loved by all" (Score:4, Interesting)
Americans (and Brits, I would presume) might not readily understand this, given that their political space is mostly a circus, but what the Thai king gets is not just love, but respect. He kinda embodies their culture and their identity; they even use a different dialect when addressing the royal family. Heck, the grandfather of the current king, Rama V, is actually venerated as a demi-god; he regularly makes an appearance in most Thai families' prayer rooms, next to Buddha and other gods. This, in turn, is a throwback to the old tradition of treating the king as a devaraja [wikipedia.org].
Those laws, then, exist not to enforce a single person's ego, but as a way to warn us barangs to not overstep on to the things that the Thais respect.
The king has no policy oversight on anything in Thailand, and hasn't had for decades now. Quite a red-herring to conflate other issues with that of free-speech.
(Not to say I actually support the laws - censorship in any form is bad - but it's important to understand the historical and cultural context within which they exist.)
Royal Family (Score:5, Funny)
Now, sue me. Just try it. In *my* country i can say this, so go away.
vacations cancelled (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, (Score:2, Flamebait)
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
Re:Well, (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re:Well, (Score:5, Insightful)
a. Do the right thing and denounce the law as unfair and unjust, telling your supporters not to be so overzealous, or
b. Silently accept the law, and reap the benefits of being able to "forgive" people for insulting you by pardoning them. Fools think you're a hero for being so generous.
Robbing someone of 15 years of their life and then giving it back isn't generous, it's cruelty. The people are foolish enough to support it, and the king does nothing about it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Public Policy Exception (Score:3, Informative)
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 coun
Re:Royal Family (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You'd think so, but that's not always true [slashdot.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
'like' or 'dont like' doesnt come in to play here. Its all about rights, not preferences.
Re: (Score:3)
As for any culture that is foolish enough to support them, that is their problem to resolve and mine to simply mock (technically speaking it is only patriotic once they have been removed and you are endeavo
Universally adored? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.)
Re:Universally adored? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Ghyslain, just get over it already.
Re:Universally adored? (Score:5, Informative)
Or is he universally adored in Thailand because it's illegal not to?
I live in Thailand, and there's no doubting the King is genuinely universally adored. For example, to celebrate his 60th year on the throne the royal family asked people to wear yellow shirts (the royal colour) on Mondays. That was months ago, but still in Bangkok now every Monday at least 50% of the people you see about are voluntarily wearing yellow shirts with "We live the King" written in Thai on them. No one has a bad word to say about the King even in private, and just about every household has a picture of the King and Queen too.
There's no doubt in my mind the affection is genuine and not legally mandated (after all, the Crown Prince is protected by the same law but much less venerated), although to what extent it's caused by "brainwashing" and propaganda is somewhat arguable. After all, if you're only ever told how wonderful your King is and all the good things he's done for the country and never hear a word of criticism, then who wouldn't love him ?
(Damn, I wish I could have people thrown in prison for making fun of me on the Internet. Wow.)
Interestingly, the King himself actually told people him and his ideas shouldn't be above criticism in one of his birthday speeches - though he's probably the only person in Thailand who could publically make such a statement! He also pardoned the Swiss guy jailed for lese majesty very quickly, so he doesn't seem to be the instigator to me.
As to why people put the videos on youtube, well who knows, but Thais I know who have seen the video are very angry about it - much more so about that than the fact that youtube is blocked. I've seen quite a few "boycott youtube" messages on Thai websites, so whatever else the failings of the junta government they do seem to be in touch with the feelings of the population on this issue, and they could have faced a bigger problem if they'd done nothing. It seems strange to me Google accommodate China's censorship and oppression but are unwilling to work with Thailand on this issue.
Personally I find the block very frustrating though, I didn't realise how often I went to youtube following some link or other before this!
Re:Universally adored? (Score:5, Insightful)
China = $$$$$$$$$$$$$
Thailand = $
I think that basically explains it.
Applaud (Score:5, Funny)
Hrm... (Score:4, Funny)
Hrm...
Re:Hrm... (Score:5, Insightful)
No more Duke of Ears jokes, no more Hakenkreuz-Harry, no "why can't Camilla ride a horse" jokes... the world would be poorer
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It helps to know what she looks like [t-online.ch].
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Hrm... (Score:5, Informative)
And this, my friends, is why we we have the 1st Amendment to the Constitution in the U.S.
Your lesson in American History and Civics brought to you today by the King of Thailand -- Universally Adored by Thais everywhere!
another proud American (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:another proud American (Score:5, Funny)
"Unlike you, we have true free speech", the American says, "see, I could go right to the White House and shout, 'Reagan is an asshole' as much as I like, and they won't do anything to me!"
"Then we have free speech in the USSR as well", shrugs the Russian. "I can, too, go to the Red Square and shout 'Reagan is an asshole' as much as I like, and they won't do anything to me either".
Re:Hrm... (Score:5, Insightful)
A user on YouTube has created some commentary that has to be the most intelligent thing I've heard on the situation up until now:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vnz7lwh0pCM [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Unless, of course, children might see it - then all bets are off.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The difference is that Denmark is a liberal democracy and Thailand is a vicious military dictatorship. And no, it wasn't much of a "democracy" before the coup either. The Queen of Denmark would never consider jailing someone for insulting her, nor would the parlia
oooh! Witty comeback! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Here we go again (Score:5, Insightful)
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 (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Here we go again (Score:5, Funny)
Like with 09 f9 11 02 9d 74 e3 5b d8 41 56 c5 63 56 88 c0 on his forehead...
rj
The government of Thailand (Score:2, Interesting)
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. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You tube should plead guilty! (Score:5, Funny)
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!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Since a lawyer will no doubt be representing the "abstract embodiment of an American corporational contract owned by another abstract entity" in court, shouldn't the lawyer also represent that "abstract embodiment of an American corporational contract owned by another abstract entity" in jail?
Nice... (Score:3, Informative)
Why do I get the image (Score:5, Interesting)
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 (Score:4, Funny)
Fundamentally different: this would involve extradition from America.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ok, I am going to respond to this obvious troll because somehow it god modded way up (shame on you mods). Australian law is anagolous to the US law that the extradited suspect was charged under (what he was charged with is illegal in both countries). However, in this case the US has no law even remolte
Um.... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.... (Score:5, Funny)
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.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
WTF is it with people in the east and feet? Seriously. Why do they generate such intense emotions? They're utilitarian. Sometimes they're icky, but sometimes they're sensual (mmm foot rubs). There's no reason to either hate or love feet. Their cultural revulsion to feet is as perverse as a foot fetish would be.
Re:Um.... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
sovereignty (Score:3, Insightful)
Get the fuck over it. Seriously.
The laws are lame. Tough shit Thailand.
No, tough shit *you*. Thailand is enjoying something called sovereignty: the power to rule itself as a country. If they want to make a law banning showing the king next to feet- that's their goddamn right.
If they're happy, then there's no real problem. I'm guessing you're a "fellow" American. I wish people like you would stop giving our country a bad reputation as being full of arrogant, bossy idiots who want to tell everyone
What goes around... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
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 paraph
Re: (Score:2)
So they should probably prosecute the Australian in an Australian court under the Australian version of the DMCA then huh?
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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 Franc
Protected by law?! (Score:2)
"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?! (Score:5, Interesting)
Simple, Don't take the party plane near Thailand. (Score:3, Interesting)
*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"?
OP, RTFA. (Score:5, Informative)
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 (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe there is a relationship between this universal adoration and the tough laws that prevent Thais from expressing opinions to the contrary.
Re:Expression (Score:5, Informative)
I can answer that for you. He will tell you that King Rama IX brought democracy to Thailand, uses his vast wealth to help poor, rural parts of the country, and is just generally a great guy. He also has gone on record stating that the laws against criticizing the monarch are stupid, and often pardons those convicted of criticizing him.
And no, I am not Thai by any stretch of the imagination.
NOW we might finally get an answer! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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 (Score:5, Interesting)
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
Not sure what the king has to worry about (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Its the YouTube sys admins I feel sorry for (Score:2)
Mocking the Royal Family (Score:2, Informative)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll get this in (Score:4, Informative)
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: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, this will quietly eliminate the mocking. (Score:5, Insightful)
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: (Score:2)
Freedom of speech is more important than your king (Score:2)
unfortunately i dont care for your king, for example, and i side with youtube on that matter.
This story is useless without pictures. (Score:2)
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 (Score:4, Funny)
Ah the daily google got sued post (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Because, well, if they want to play hardball, they can. They pretty much "own" the search engine market. Trying to press money from us? Ok. Google search won't find you anymore. You don't exist. Go away.
Great idea (Score:3, Funny)
Foot icon? (Score:5, Funny)
Of course he's universally adored (Score:4, Insightful)
Ok, if there are laws that prohibit insults against the royal family (like sending people to jail for 15 years), the king will be universally adored.
Re: (Score:2)
almost => there exists someone who doesn't adore the king
note: lack of existential operators inhibited the workings of this post!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Slashdotter Replies (Score:5, Insightful)
What happened to respecting other peoples cultures and religious beliefs anyway?
They are *tolerated* not respected.
This is as it should be.
As in "Wow, you believe in some idiotic shit. Oh well, whatever floats your boat" as opposed to "OMFG you believe in the divinity of the taco?!? I'm never eating at Taco Bell again out of respect for your stupid
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Absurd. (Score:4, Insightful)
Any kind of speech. At all. In every form. All should be protected in that there should be no laws favoring or opposing any of it preferentially - favor it all. Speech even in pictorial form (one of the oldest forms of written communication fer cryin out loud), prose, whatever. Say what you want. Just realize that others can too.
Decency and mutual respect can only occur when the powers are not favoring one over the other. if some people can say certain things and others can not you have just created friction greater than just letting people handle themselves.