Twitter Meets the Law

Nik Barron - www.virus.org - 15 November 2010Security

The risks of making 'off-the-cuff' comments on-line

A couple of recent cases involving Twitter have highlighted the risks  of making off the cuff comments in an online medium like Twitter. The  well-publicised case of Paul Chambers involved him posting a vague  threat about blowing up the local airport if they didn't sort themselves  out. Apparently this was spotted by an off duty airport worker and then,  quite rightly, treated as a non-issue by the airport security staff, but  somehow ended up escalating. In the end Chambers was visited by the  local police and subsequently charged under section 127 of the  Communications Act, which prohibits the use of public communications  systems to send "menacing" messages.

In a similar case, Birmingham councillor Gareth Compton asked if anyone  would "stone to death" the journalist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown after she suggested that the Prime Minister should not criticise the Chinese Goverment's human rights record due to allegations made about the behaviour of British forces. Compton was also charged under the  Communications Act.

In both of these cases the issue seems to lie with the Judge's  acceptance that the threats were genuinely menacing, and would be  accepted as so by the general public. Whether this requires a change in  the law or just a better appreciation by judges of general public  perception of such "threats" is a matter for some debate. Some  commentators have attempted to pick apart the Communications Act,  arguing that Twitter should be subject to the same sort of exemptions as  those that apply to broadcast media.

While it seems (to me at least) that the law has been applied in a  somewhat heavy handed fashion in these cases, it is foolish to expect  that "Internet speech" should receive some sort of special protection  over and above normal communications. The laws regarding obscene,  offensive and libellous material published in any medium are notoriously  complex and require a fair degree of interpretation in an appropriate  context. The problem is that, whereas in the good old days of print  media most publishers were reasonably well versed in the legal issues,  now that everyone is a publisher the majority of the public have never  heard of the relevant legislation, never mind picked up a legal textbook  (indeed most computer security professionals have probably never read  one either). Ignorance of the law is seldom an admissible defence.

For corporate users it is essential to have guidelines in place  regarding the use of company systems for posting material on the  Internet. Although far from a foolproof defence, having a policy in  place does provide a degree of protection if an employee oversteps the  legal bounds in their postings.

Of course with any legal matters, consulting a properly qualified legal  professional for detailed advice is strongly recommended.

More information: Out-Law.com and here www.inventpartners.com and here www.legislation.gov.uk