|
Showing posts with label Blogger. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Blogger. Show all posts
Saturday, December 06, 2014
When did the Blogger/Google calendar change?
Sunday, July 20, 2014
French blogger fined £1,200 after negative review that described restaurant as 'the place to avoid' appeared too high on Google searches
- French blogger Caroline Doudet was ordered to pay damages to restaurant
- Judge also ordered the title of the restaurant review to be altered
- Restaurant owners sued Ms Doudet claiming the review was hurting their business
PUBLISHED: 03:20 EST, 18 July 2014 | UPDATED: 06:20 EST, 18 July 2014
A French blogger has been fined £1,200 after a judge ruled a negative restaurant review appeared too high on Google searches.
Caroline Doudet was also ordered to amend the title of her review, written in August 2013, which described the restaurant as 'the place to avoid in Cap-Ferret.'
Owners of the Il Giardino restaurant, in the Aquitaine region of southwestern France, sued Ms Doudet claiming the review, which appeared fourth in Google searches, was hurting their business.
A French blogger has been fined £1,200 after writing a negative review of the Il Giardino restaurant, in the Aquitaine region of southwestern France
A judge in Bordeaux this month ordered the review's title be altered and told Ms Doudet to pay the restaurant €1,500 in damages, along with €1,000 to cover the compainant's costs.
Ms Doudet told the BBC: 'This decision creates a new crime of "being too highly ranked [on a search engine]", or of having too great an influence.
'What is perverse, is that we look for bloggers who are influential, but only if they are nice about people.'
More...
Council blows £214,000 over five years on hunt for blogger who insulted councillors as he promised to 'expose the truth'
Couple who's lawn died in California drought threatened with $500 in fines and criminal action if they don't water it and more fines if they water it TOO much
Ms Doudet's blog, Cultur'elle, has about 3,000 followers, which the judge said had exacerbated the damage caused to the restaurant.
The restaurant owner told French website Arrêt sur Images, as cited by the BBC: 'Maybe there were some errors in the service, that happens sometimes in the middle of August - I recognise that.
'But this article showed in the Google search results and did my business more and more harm, even though we have worked seven days a week for 15 years. I could not accept that.'
Ms Doudet's blog, Cultur'elle has about 3,000 followers, which the judge said had exacerbated the damage caused to the restaurant
While the decision is believed to be the first time an unpaid blogger has been ordered to pay damages following a negative review, the case is not thought to have created legal precedence in France because it was an emergency measure.
Under French law, such emergency measures can be carried out if a defendant is found to be causing harm to another party.
Ms Doudet has decided to delete the review, rather than change the title, because it was 'easier',Wired.co.uk has reported.
Earlier this month it was reported South Tyneside Council had spent £200,000 on a hunt for a notorious internet blogger known as Mr Monkey after he insulted local councillors.
The anonymous writer referred to councillors as ‘Pudgy Face’, ‘Miss Piggy’, ‘King of Sleaze’ and ‘The Fat Mackem Hobbit’ as he promised to ‘expose the truth’ behind their alleged lies.
Despite the internet troll abandoning the blog in 2009, the north east council have only just called off the manhunt - having spent the last five years searching for him.
The council launched the search after insisting they had a ‘duty of care’ to protect their employees from malicious accusations made online.
SourceMs Doudet has decided to delete the review, rather than change the title, because it was 'easier',Wired.co.uk has reported.
Earlier this month it was reported South Tyneside Council had spent £200,000 on a hunt for a notorious internet blogger known as Mr Monkey after he insulted local councillors.
The anonymous writer referred to councillors as ‘Pudgy Face’, ‘Miss Piggy’, ‘King of Sleaze’ and ‘The Fat Mackem Hobbit’ as he promised to ‘expose the truth’ behind their alleged lies.
Despite the internet troll abandoning the blog in 2009, the north east council have only just called off the manhunt - having spent the last five years searching for him.
The council launched the search after insisting they had a ‘duty of care’ to protect their employees from malicious accusations made online.
.
Thursday, June 27, 2013
Free Speech or Hate Speech? Britain Bans U.S. Anti-Muslim Bloggers
VIEW FROM EUROPE
JUNE 27, 2013, 9:45 AM
LONDON — A British decision to bar a visit by two prominent American anti-Islam activists has prompted righteous indignation from the targets of the ban as well as a more measured debate about the limits of free speech.
Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, right-wing bloggers and co-founders of Stop Islamization of America, on Wednesday received letters from Theresa May, Britain’s home secretary responsible for interior affairs, telling them that their presence would “not be conducive to the public good.”
The pair had been due to address a rally on Saturday of the far-right English Defense League (E.D.L.) in the London suburb of Woolwich, whereLee Rigby, a British soldier, was killed in a vicious daylight attack on May 22.
Their association with the E.D.L. stems from the British group’s pastsupport for their campaign against the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque,” a planned mosque and community center near the site of the World Trade Center in Lower Manhattan.
The decision to keep them out was based on the likelihood they would use their visit to repeat what were regarded as their unacceptable and provocative statements about Muslims that might foment violence.
Ms. Geller, a self-styled human rights activist, wrote on her blog, Atlas Shrugged, that her only crime was her “principled dedication to freedom.”
Mr. Spencer, who runs the Jihad Watch Web site, said the British decision amounted to a ban on those who “oppose jihad violence and Islamic supremacism.”
Ms. May took her decision in the context of a reported increase in attackson mosques and other Islamic centers since Drummer Rigby’s murder, for which two Muslims have been charged and which the E.D.L. is accused of exploiting in order to fuel anti-Islamic sentiment.
News of the ban coincided with reports that a mosque in the English town of Redditch was broken into and daubed with Swastikas, racist slogans and the letters “EDL.”
As Ms. Geller proclaimed that Britain had killed the Magna Carta, a government spokesman was quoted by the BBC as saying, “We condemn all those whose behaviors and views run counter to our shared values and will not stand for extremism in any form.”
The ban followed a campaign by Britain’s anti-fascist Hope Not Hate movement against allowing the pair into the country.
Matthew Collins, a researcher with the organization, welcomed the decision and said, “They only wanted to come here and help the E.D.L. stir up more trouble. Britain doesn’t need more hate even just for a few days.”
Keith Vaz, an opposition Labour Party legislator, also welcomed Ms. May’s decision, saying, “The U.K. should never become a stage for inflammatory speakers who promote hate.”
However, James Bloodworth, a left-wing British commentator, warned of the risk of turning Ms. Geller and Mr. Spencer into “free speech martyrs.”
Writing before the ban was announced, he said it would be counterproductive.
“These people already self-pityingly style themselves as a silent majority whose opinions are repressed by the state,” he wrote at the Left Foot Forward Web site. “Do we really want to provide them with such easy ammunition to throw back at us?”
“Banning them for what they might say is also dangerous territory,” he wrote. “Free speech within the law should be paramount.”
Ben Cohen, a British contributor to the American magazine Commentary, said the ban reflected double standards on the part of a country that had put up with the presence of Islamic extremists.
“One does not have to an admirer of Geller and Spencer — to my mind, their views are terrifyingly shrill and bigoted — in order to consider this decision outrageous,” he wrote.
“Banning Geller and Spencer will not mollify those British Muslims already on the path to self-radicalization,” Mr. Cohen wrote. “Nor is it likely to end the disturbing spate of attacks on mosques in the wake of Lee Rigby’s killing.”
The main result of the ban was to make British democracy look weak and spiteful at precisely the time it needed to look strong and confident, he concluded.
What do you think? Is Britain right to want to keep out potential troublemakers? Does a desire to preserve public order sometimes trump the right to free speech?
Source
.
Leon Neal/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Supporters of the English Defense League at a protest following the killing of an off-duty British soldier, Lee Rigby, in London.
LONDON — A British decision to bar a visit by two prominent American anti-Islam activists has prompted righteous indignation from the targets of the ban as well as a more measured debate about the limits of free speech.
Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, right-wing bloggers and co-founders of Stop Islamization of America, on Wednesday received letters from Theresa May, Britain’s home secretary responsible for interior affairs, telling them that their presence would “not be conducive to the public good.”
The pair had been due to address a rally on Saturday of the far-right English Defense League (E.D.L.) in the London suburb of Woolwich, whereLee Rigby, a British soldier, was killed in a vicious daylight attack on May 22.
Their association with the E.D.L. stems from the British group’s pastsupport for their campaign against the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque,” a planned mosque and community center near the site of the World Trade Center in Lower Manhattan.
The decision to keep them out was based on the likelihood they would use their visit to repeat what were regarded as their unacceptable and provocative statements about Muslims that might foment violence.
Ms. Geller, a self-styled human rights activist, wrote on her blog, Atlas Shrugged, that her only crime was her “principled dedication to freedom.”
Mr. Spencer, who runs the Jihad Watch Web site, said the British decision amounted to a ban on those who “oppose jihad violence and Islamic supremacism.”
Ms. May took her decision in the context of a reported increase in attackson mosques and other Islamic centers since Drummer Rigby’s murder, for which two Muslims have been charged and which the E.D.L. is accused of exploiting in order to fuel anti-Islamic sentiment.
News of the ban coincided with reports that a mosque in the English town of Redditch was broken into and daubed with Swastikas, racist slogans and the letters “EDL.”
As Ms. Geller proclaimed that Britain had killed the Magna Carta, a government spokesman was quoted by the BBC as saying, “We condemn all those whose behaviors and views run counter to our shared values and will not stand for extremism in any form.”
The ban followed a campaign by Britain’s anti-fascist Hope Not Hate movement against allowing the pair into the country.
Matthew Collins, a researcher with the organization, welcomed the decision and said, “They only wanted to come here and help the E.D.L. stir up more trouble. Britain doesn’t need more hate even just for a few days.”
Keith Vaz, an opposition Labour Party legislator, also welcomed Ms. May’s decision, saying, “The U.K. should never become a stage for inflammatory speakers who promote hate.”
However, James Bloodworth, a left-wing British commentator, warned of the risk of turning Ms. Geller and Mr. Spencer into “free speech martyrs.”
Writing before the ban was announced, he said it would be counterproductive.
“These people already self-pityingly style themselves as a silent majority whose opinions are repressed by the state,” he wrote at the Left Foot Forward Web site. “Do we really want to provide them with such easy ammunition to throw back at us?”
“Banning them for what they might say is also dangerous territory,” he wrote. “Free speech within the law should be paramount.”
Ben Cohen, a British contributor to the American magazine Commentary, said the ban reflected double standards on the part of a country that had put up with the presence of Islamic extremists.
“One does not have to an admirer of Geller and Spencer — to my mind, their views are terrifyingly shrill and bigoted — in order to consider this decision outrageous,” he wrote.
“Banning Geller and Spencer will not mollify those British Muslims already on the path to self-radicalization,” Mr. Cohen wrote. “Nor is it likely to end the disturbing spate of attacks on mosques in the wake of Lee Rigby’s killing.”
The main result of the ban was to make British democracy look weak and spiteful at precisely the time it needed to look strong and confident, he concluded.
What do you think? Is Britain right to want to keep out potential troublemakers? Does a desire to preserve public order sometimes trump the right to free speech?
Source
.
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
French historian kills himself at Notre Dame Cathedral after gay marriage rant
Far-right essayist Dominique Venner, 78, shoots himself at altar after writing blogpost condemning same-sex marriage law
Angelique Chrisafis in Paris
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 21 May 2013 14.12 EDT
French police officers cordon off Notre Dame Cathedral, Paris. Photograph: AFP/Getty
A far-right French historian has killed himself at the altar of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris after declaring that more radical action was needed in opposition to same-sex marriage in France.
Dominique Venner, 78, walked into the building at 4pm and put a letter on the altar before shooting himself through the mouth, according to local media reports. Hundreds of visitors were immediately evacuated from the site, which is the most visited Catholic monument in Paris.
The motive for the suicide and the contents of the letter were not immediately clear, although Marine Le Pen, head of the far-right Front National, tweeted her "respect" for Venner and said his death was an "eminently political" gesture.
Manuel Valls, the French interior minister, arrived as officers cordoned off the site. He told French TV: "At the time of this act, the suicide of a desperate man, there were 1,500 people in the cathedral. These people were evacuated very quickly."
He said worshippers and tourists must have been in shock, adding: "Notre Dame is one of the most beautiful symbols of the capital and our country, and we can measure the impact of such an act."
Police stand guard after evacuating the building. Photograph: Yoan Valat/EPA
The rector of Notre Dame, Monsignor Patrick Jacquin, said it was the first suicide in decades at the 850-year-old cathedral, which is visited by some 13 million people each year, and perhaps the first time anyone had taken their own life in the building. "It's unfortunate, it's dramatic and it's shocking," he said.
Venner, a historian and former member of the Secret Army Organisation that opposed Algerian independence in the early 1960s and waged a terror campaign against Charles de Gaulle's government, had written on his blog on Tuesday about his anger over the recent legalisation of same-sex marriage, which he called vile.
Referring to a rally planned for Sunday against the law, which also amended adoption rights, he said the demonstrators were "right to shout their impatience and anger".
He also wrote of what he described as the risk of "a France fallen to the power of Islamists", saying that for 40 years all governments and parties, except the Front National, businesses and the church had accelerated north African immigration. He added that there needed to be "new gestures, spectacular and symbolic" to "reawaken the memory of our origins". He added: "We're entering a time where words should be authenticated by actions."
The bill became law on Saturday after a parliament vote and months of street protests, political slanging matches and a rise in homophobic attacks.
The rector of Notre Dame, Monsignor Patrick Jacquin, said it was the first suicide in decades at the 850-year-old cathedral, which is visited by some 13 million people each year, and perhaps the first time anyone had taken their own life in the building. "It's unfortunate, it's dramatic and it's shocking," he said.
Venner, a historian and former member of the Secret Army Organisation that opposed Algerian independence in the early 1960s and waged a terror campaign against Charles de Gaulle's government, had written on his blog on Tuesday about his anger over the recent legalisation of same-sex marriage, which he called vile.
Referring to a rally planned for Sunday against the law, which also amended adoption rights, he said the demonstrators were "right to shout their impatience and anger".
He also wrote of what he described as the risk of "a France fallen to the power of Islamists", saying that for 40 years all governments and parties, except the Front National, businesses and the church had accelerated north African immigration. He added that there needed to be "new gestures, spectacular and symbolic" to "reawaken the memory of our origins". He added: "We're entering a time where words should be authenticated by actions."
The bill became law on Saturday after a parliament vote and months of street protests, political slanging matches and a rise in homophobic attacks.
The 850-year-old cathedral is among France's most popular landmarks, with some 13 million visitors a year. Photograph: Vincent Wartner/20 Minutes/Sipa
François Hollande had made the legislation his flagship social reform, but the move triggered the biggest conservative and rightwing street protests in 30 years, followed by skirmishes near parliament that led to more than 200 arrests.
France is the ninth country in Europe and the 14th globally to legalise same-sex marriage. A concert to celebrate the law was scheduled to be held at Bastille in Paris on Tuesday night.
The country's first gay marriage is scheduled to take place in Montpellier, in the south, on 29 May between Vincent Autin, 40, who works in the tourist office, and Bruno Boileau, 30, a public sector employee.
More than 172 hours of heated debate in the parliament and senate meant the bill was one of the most debated in recent history, with furious clashes and a near fist-fight in the National Assembly.
One rightwing MP claimed the government was "killing children" by allowing same-sex married couples to adopt, while a senator said gay marriage would pave the way for people being able to marry animals or objects.
MPs in favour of the bill – the most significant social reform since France banned the death penalty in 1981 – suffered death threats; skinheads attacked a gay bar in Lille, while rights groups reported a surge in homophobic attacks.
One victim of such an attack, a Dutchman who lives in Paris, Wilfred de Brujin posted a picture of his bloodstained face on Facebook. The image was captioned: "Sorry to show you this. It's the face of homophobia."
François Hollande had made the legislation his flagship social reform, but the move triggered the biggest conservative and rightwing street protests in 30 years, followed by skirmishes near parliament that led to more than 200 arrests.
France is the ninth country in Europe and the 14th globally to legalise same-sex marriage. A concert to celebrate the law was scheduled to be held at Bastille in Paris on Tuesday night.
The country's first gay marriage is scheduled to take place in Montpellier, in the south, on 29 May between Vincent Autin, 40, who works in the tourist office, and Bruno Boileau, 30, a public sector employee.
More than 172 hours of heated debate in the parliament and senate meant the bill was one of the most debated in recent history, with furious clashes and a near fist-fight in the National Assembly.
One rightwing MP claimed the government was "killing children" by allowing same-sex married couples to adopt, while a senator said gay marriage would pave the way for people being able to marry animals or objects.
MPs in favour of the bill – the most significant social reform since France banned the death penalty in 1981 – suffered death threats; skinheads attacked a gay bar in Lille, while rights groups reported a surge in homophobic attacks.
One victim of such an attack, a Dutchman who lives in Paris, Wilfred de Brujin posted a picture of his bloodstained face on Facebook. The image was captioned: "Sorry to show you this. It's the face of homophobia."
.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Blogger Blog takedown notification
I came home this evening and this was in my eMAIL inbox:
Blogger Blog takedown notification
support@blogger.com 3:00 PM (4 hours ago)
to me, blogger-dmca-n.
Blogger has been notified, according to the terms of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), that certain content in your blog is alleged to infringe upon the copyrights of others. As a result, we have reset the post(s) to \"draft\" status. (If we did not do so, we would be subject to a claim of copyright infringement, regardless of its merits. The URL(s) of the allegedly infringing post(s) may be found at the end of this message.) This means your post - and any images, links or other content - is not gone. You may edit the post to remove the offending content and republish, at which point the post in question will be visible to your readers again.
A bit of background: the DMCA is a United States copyright law that provides guidelines for online service provider liability in case of copyright infringement. If you believe you have the rights to post the content at issue here, you can file a counter-claim. In order to file a counter-claim, please see http://www.google.com/support/bin/request.py?contact_type=lr_counternotice&product=blogger.
The notice that we received, with any personally identifying information removed, will be posted online by a service called Chilling Effects at http://www.chillingeffects.org/. We do this in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). You can search for the DMCA notice associated with the removal of your content by going to the Chilling Effects search page at http://www.chillingeffects.org/search.cgi, and entering in the URL of the blog post that was removed.
If it is brought to our attention that you have republished the post without removing the content/link in question, then we will delete your post and count it as a violation on your account. Repeated violations to our Terms of Service may result in further remedial action taken against your Blogger account including deleting your blog and/or terminating your account. DMCA notices concerning content on your blog may also result in action taken against any associated AdSense accounts. If you have legal questions about this notification, you should retain your own legal counsel.
Sincerely,
The Blogger Team
Affected URLs:
[{http://endrtimes.blogspot.com/2011/05/generation-change-ignite-church.html]
P.S.
Regarding the article censored: Who do you think it belonged to?
Thanks brethren!
.
Blogger Blog takedown notification
support@blogger.com 3:00 PM (4 hours ago)
to me, blogger-dmca-n.
Blogger has been notified, according to the terms of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), that certain content in your blog is alleged to infringe upon the copyrights of others. As a result, we have reset the post(s) to \"draft\" status. (If we did not do so, we would be subject to a claim of copyright infringement, regardless of its merits. The URL(s) of the allegedly infringing post(s) may be found at the end of this message.) This means your post - and any images, links or other content - is not gone. You may edit the post to remove the offending content and republish, at which point the post in question will be visible to your readers again.
A bit of background: the DMCA is a United States copyright law that provides guidelines for online service provider liability in case of copyright infringement. If you believe you have the rights to post the content at issue here, you can file a counter-claim. In order to file a counter-claim, please see http://www.google.com/support/bin/request.py?contact_type=lr_counternotice&product=blogger.
The notice that we received, with any personally identifying information removed, will be posted online by a service called Chilling Effects at http://www.chillingeffects.org/. We do this in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). You can search for the DMCA notice associated with the removal of your content by going to the Chilling Effects search page at http://www.chillingeffects.org/search.cgi, and entering in the URL of the blog post that was removed.
If it is brought to our attention that you have republished the post without removing the content/link in question, then we will delete your post and count it as a violation on your account. Repeated violations to our Terms of Service may result in further remedial action taken against your Blogger account including deleting your blog and/or terminating your account. DMCA notices concerning content on your blog may also result in action taken against any associated AdSense accounts. If you have legal questions about this notification, you should retain your own legal counsel.
Sincerely,
The Blogger Team
Affected URLs:
[{http://endrtimes.blogspot.com/2011/05/generation-change-ignite-church.html]
P.S.
Regarding the article censored: Who do you think it belonged to?
The Florida General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists.
Thanks brethren!
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)