In a world where everyone can ‘publish’ using tools such as Wordpress and YouTube is it relevant to be prosecuting the service ? In fact, would it not make far more sense to treat such services similarly to telephony providers ?

Surely, in a world in which everyone can publish, they are the ones who should become liable for any consequences of such publication ?

In your opinion, what are WordPress.com’s responsibilities?

Oh, whatever WordPress believes their responsibilities are. Of course, that doesn’t necessarily stop someone from trying to necessarily tell them via court (knock on wood) what they should be.

But getting away from that, which arguably might be considered irrelevant in the specific case at hand (i.e. “the Brazilian judge / the ban of WP”), yes: it’s far more productive to explain the mechanics, as Lorelle also sagely suggests.

The reason I’m insisting on taking the rose-tinted glasses off (put differently: stop assessing the world alongside only locally applicable criteria) is that it doesn’t help to get stuck on the differences; the incriminatory/accusatory mode of communication won’t either address or remedy the situation.

It’s like trying to resolve real-world problems by way of litigation, by legal order only; I think that especially in civil law, an underlying willingness to reach a reasonable mutually acceptable compromise is more important (productive) than even the wisest judgments might accomplish. An Andalusian gypsy curse comes to mind: may you have lawsuits, and win them. In this case (”Brazilian judge/WP”) a more politically/practical approach seems more productive than a purely legal approach. Of course, I’m not dismissing litigation - it’s just that in an international context, things get really messy really quick (and I’d like to casually note that it’s not an entirely irrelevant or coincidental circumstance that the ICJ and the ICC are such hotly controversial issues specifically in the US).

To me at least it’s clear in this case that explaining the basic schematics (or even “business model”) of Web 2.0 type enterprises such as WordPress.com is more conducive to letting applicable local law run its course without causing disproportional injury to tangentially caught up parties (WP here), than exchanging mutually inert claims to legal precepts. Out of that explanation comes the insight that WordPress.com is at best providing a publishing tool, in which in this case (as I understand it) a YouTube.com item was placed, for which YouTube (assuming it took reasonable action on its part to provide remedy) in turn could point to (for example) the ISP of the person causing the hubbub.

On the other hand, the very definition of what constitutes “reasonably action” and its mandated parameters is what is subject to varying traditions and expectations to which I referred initially. That’s why in the balance and in my opinion — aside from pursuing a practical, amicable solution such as providing necessary information as suggested — it’s not a “freedom of speech” issue, but of properly understanding the scope and practical limits of legal remedy in and by itself that which points to the best course of action.

So, while I’m not convinced that the path to practical solutions for real-world problems necessarily concludes in the hands of legal counsel (or judges), legal counsel (or judges) are a necessary part of that path.

Having said that: darn, an Atari 400… I started off with the later 400XL - if only I had kept my copy of “The Atari BASIC Sourcebook”… Its most valuable part to me was its fantastic preface, with its first-hand account of how SMI developed its ROM-based BASIC to fit into a whopping 8KB, well within six months, by a microscopic team of developers. I felt almost sacrilegious when years later I bought the 130XE, with all that wasteful RAM available in four banks of no less than 32KB each! Ah, golden days…

PS: Lorelle, trust me when I say I understand the expat angle - I’m a “yurpeen” expat in the US.

I appreciate your taking the time to respond and your kind words.

FYI - my 12-year-old son just finished reading your “Blogging Tips” book (got it from you at Dallas WordCamp). He’s created a list of things from your book that he will be implementing on his blog during the next month.

The book is an excellent resource for him (and anyone else who blogs).

Best wishes,

-Mike

Thanks for responding.

Other than the variances between free speech rights across the globe, it appears that you and others discussing Lorelle’s post agree with the bulk of what she wrote. I suspect that if we focus on the areas of common agreement, the blogosphere will have more impact in getting desired results.

Best wishes,

-Mike

I am thrilled that people are talking about this issue, especially when so many stayed quiet when I published about the bans in Turkey and China and elsewhere, especially as those were clearly freedom of speech issues. Having lived many years as an X-pat, I am frustrated with the apathy of my own country, as well as so many “civilized” countries around the world, so I’m thrilled that my kick in the butt to talk about this issue has resulted in people starting to think and blog “actively” instead of sitting back and watching.

By talking, we are educating ourselves and others by sharing our opinions and expertise on the subject. Maybe some of that will trickle down to those in a place to enforce such decisions in the future, realizing that their attempts to ban the single impacts whole communities, and reconsider.

Thank you for being a part of spreading the educational and legal aspects of this issue.

And moreover, that to expect global outcries and outbursts of similar righteous indignation stemming from the same expectations of different legal systems is naive at best and ridiculously narrow sighted to boot.

So, while I agree with the mindful and practical suggestions derived from “common sense and responsibility” in the first half, presented under the heading “What Responsibility Should WordPress.com Bear?”, both my thumbs go down on the second half of her post, under the to me somewhat amusing heading “What Happened to Our Enthusiasm for Protecting Freedom of Speech?”