TuneIn worldwide free radio app blocks UK internet users from listening in to foreign channels

Read more awcf.htm at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from torrentfreak.com

In 2019, the High Court of England and Wales ruled that by offering an index of non UK-based or unlicensed radio stations to UK residents, radio aggregator service TuneIn breached copyright.In response the service has now geo-blocked thousands of stations leaving UK customers without their favorite sounds. Unless they use a VPN, then it’s business as usual. TuneIn is one of the most prominent providers of radio content in the world. Available for free or on a premium basis, its site and associated app provide access to more than 100,000 stations and podcasts. Unless you happen to live in the UK, which is now dramatically underserved by the company. Sued by Labels in the UK For Mass Copyright Infringement In 2017, Sony Music Entertainment and Warner Music Group sued the US-based radio index in the High Court of England and Wales, alleging that the provision of links to stations unlicensed in the UK represented a breach of copyright. One of the most interesting aspects of the case is that TuneIn is marketed as an audio guide service, which means that it indexes stations that are already freely available on the web and curates them so that listeners can more easily find them. When stations are more easily found, more people listen to them, which means that TuneIn arguably boosts the market overall. Nevertheless, the labels claimed this was illegal and detrimental to the music industry in the UK on licensing grounds. In response to the apparent decimation of its offering, TuneIn took to Twitter to address the complaints: Due to a court ruling in the United Kingdom, we will be restricting international stations to prohibit their availability in the UK, with limited exceptions. We apologize for the inconvenience, the company wrote. See further details in article from torrentfreak.com

Privacy campaigner takes Google to court claiming illegal use of children’s data

Read more me_internet.htm at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from dailymail.co.uk

Privacy campaigner Duncan McCann has filed a legal case accusing YouTube of selling the data of children using their service to advertisers in contravention of EU and UK law The case was lodged with the UK High Court in July and is the first of its kind in Europe.It is understood that Google will strongly dispute the claim. One of its arguments is that the main YouTube platform is not intended for those under 13, who should be using the YouTube Kids app, which incorporates more safeguards. Google is also expected to point to a series of changes that it introduced last year to improve notification to parents, limit data collection and restrict personalised adverts.The case seeks compensation of £500 payable to those whose data was breached. But crucially it would set a precedent, potentially making YouTube liable for payouts to the estimated five million children in Britain who use the site as well as their parents or guardians. McCann said: It cannot be right that Google can take children’s private data without explicit permission and then sell it to advertisers to target children. I believe it is only through legal action and damages that these companies will change their behaviour, and it is only through a class action that we can fight these companies on an equal basis. The case, which focuses on children who have watched YouTube since May 2018 when the Data Protection Act became law, is backed by digital privacy campaigners Foxglove, and the global law firm Hausfeld. The case is not expected to come to court before next autumn and has been underwritten by Vannin Capital, a company which will take a cut of any compensation that remains unclaimed. The action will also depend on the outcome of another data and privacy case against Google which does not cover children.

Age Verification companies win a judicial review of the government’s decision to shelve its flawed porn censorship scheme

Problem gamblers seek to recover their losses…

Read more uk_internet_censors.htm at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from telegraph.co.uk

A coalition of age verification companies have won the first round of their legal action against the Government in a bid to force ministers to introduce a shelved internet porn censorship scheme that would provide the companies with an income.The companies launched an appeal last year, saying they developed software that was never used.A judge ruled that age verification companies, backed by children’s charities, have an arguable case that the Culture Secretary exceeded her powers by deciding not to implement the ban, which had been voted for by Parliament . The ruling means the claimants can now take the case to a judicial review, which could overturn the Government’s decision. Plans to introduce an age verification scheme were shelved in October last year, perhaps because the law did not provide any provision for keep very dangerous ID and porn browsing data private and safe. At the time, ministers said the age verification scheme as defined in the Digital Economy Act 2017 would be superceded by forthcoming Duty of Care legislation. In court, the Government argued that ministers had not exceeded their powers and that circumstances had radically altered since the porn ban legislation was originally passed.

Verified as out of pocket…

Four companies hoping to profit from cancelled porn age verification go to court seeking compensation from the government.

Read more uk_internet_censors.htm at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from telegraph.co.uk

Four age verification companies have launched legal action to challenge the government’s decision to cancel the censorship scheme requiring age verification for access to internet porn. The companies have lodged a judicial review at the High Court Thursday.The Telegraph understands the companies are arguing the decision was an abuse of power as the move had been approved by parliament. They are also claiming damages, understood to be in the region of £3 million, for losses sustained developing age verification technology. The four companies behind the judicial review – AgeChecked Ltd, VeriMe, AVYourself and AVSecure – are arguing the secretary of state only had power to choose when the scheme came into force, not scrap it in the form passed by Parliament. The legal action has been backed by campaigners from the Children’s Charities’ Coalition for Internet Safety (CCCIS), which represents organisations such as the NSPCC and Barnardo’s.The CEO of AVSecure, Stuart Lawley, a British tech entrepreneur who made his fortune in the dotcom boom, said he had personally lost millions creating the technology. He said the company, which is behind other parental control apps such as Ageblock, had been preparing for up to 10 million people signing up for the service on day one.

A bit draconian…Drill rapper banned from using the words bandoe, trapping, Booj, connect, shotting, whipping and Kitty

Read more news.htm at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from telegraph.co.uk

A drill rapper has been banned from using specific slang words in music videos in what is believed to be the first case of its kind.Ervine Kimpalu, who goes by the artist name Rico Racks, was issued with a special five year Criminal Behaviour Order when he appeared at Blackfriars Crown Court on Friday preventing him from referring to several drug-related words in his online rap videos. The words were bandoe, trapping, Booj, connect, shotting, whipping and Kitty . It also bans him from possessing articles linked to drug dealing and from owning more than one mobile phone. Racks, of Kings Cross, central London, features in several music videos posted on social media in which he is said to glamourise drug dealing.

Poaching UK history…Government blocks famous trial judges annotated copy of Lady Chatterley’s Lover from leaving the country

Read more news.htm at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from dailymail.co.uk

The obscenity trial over DH Lawrence’s novel Lady Chatterley’s Lover was a national sensation. The 1960 case was also a watershed moment in Britain’s cultural history, when the legacy of Victorian morality was finally overtaken by the liberal attitudes of the Swinging Sixties.Now that book — complete with notes by his wife — has been barred from export because of its cultural significance. The book sold for £56,250 last year and the new owner had planned to take it abroad. UK buyers now have until October to match that sum. Sir Laurence Byrne and his wife Dorothy made annotations on the copy, marking out sexually explicit passages Sir Laurence Byrne and his wife Dorothy made annotations on the copy, marking out sexually explicit passages Arts minister Michael Ellis said he hoped a buyer could be found in order to keep this important part of our nation’s history in the UK. But not to worry, this government is dreaming up lots of new censorship ideas, and no doubt this will lead to lots more trials and prosecutions, and historically significant censorship decisions.

Heroic defender of free speech is seeking a Judicial Review of unfair police rules that allow police to record incidents as hate crimes even when there is no evidence to support that claim

Read more news.htm at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See  article from dailymail.co.uk

A man investigated by police over a poem about transgenderism is launching a landmark High Court case to overhaul unfair police rules on hate crimes.Harry Miller is to seek a judicial review of the hate crime guidelines followed by police forces across Britain, claiming they are unlawful because they inhibit freedom of expression. He argues that the current guidance, published by the College of Policing in 2014, the body responsible for training officers, promotes the recording of incidents as hate crimes even when there is no evidence of hate beyond the opinion of an accuser. Miller’s legal team has highlighted a clause in the rules that state such incidents must be recorded by officers irrespective of any evidence to identify the hate element. Miller is also challenging a decision by Humberside Police to record his re-tweeting of the poem as a hate incident — despite officers concluding that no crime had been committed. He was quizzed by Humberside Police in January after posting the verse about men who transition to be women, which included the lines: You’re a man … And we can tell the difference … Your hormones are synthetic. He said he was dumbfounded by the exchange and furious when he found out that his sharing of the verse had been recorded as a hate incident. Explaining his reasons for launching legal action, the businessman told the Mail on Sunday: It is about the ability to have freedom of speech within the law and being allowed to have a debate without one group being able to call on the police to shut another group down. Free speech is being closed down by a climate of fear and secrecy and the police are contributing to this Orwellian culture.

Justice without merit…Count Dankula’s application to appeal against his conviction for an internet joke is refused

Read more news.htm at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from independent.co.uk See The Britisher’s impassioned response to the decision from YouTube See Count Dankula’s M8 Yur Dug’s a Nazi video from YouTube

A man who suffered a miscarriage of justice after being convicted for a joke has been refused permission to appeal against a conviction for supposedly causing gross offence. Mark Meechan, who blogs under the name Count Dankula, was fined £800 in April after being found guilty under the Communications Act over a  video joke in which he trained his girlfriend’s dog to perform Nazi salutes. A letter from the court claimed the appeal was not arguable and in each of its elements is wholly misconceived. It also dismissed arguments made by Meechan’s lawyers over the judge’s handling of witness evidence at Airdrie Sheriff Court in March and the meaning of grossly offensive. The letter said: The appeal against conviction is without merit. Likewise the appeal against sentence is not arguable — this was a deeply unpleasant offence in which disgraceful and utterly offensive material was very widely distributed by the appellant, it said. This was to the considerable distress of the community in question and — just as disturbingly — to the apparent approval of a large number of persons who appear to share the appellant’s racist views. Indeed it must be observed that in the circumstance the appellant was fortunate that the learned sheriff was not considering custody as an option.

Weapons drill…Court bans London gang from producing drill music video featuring violence

Read more news.htm at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from bbc.com

Five gang members caught with machetes and baseball bats have been banned from making drill music glorifying violence.Members of the 1011 gang were jailed or detained for conspiracy to commit violent disorder, in Notting Hill. The Criminal Behaviour Orders (CBOs), thought to be the first of their kind, bans the group from mentioning death or injury in songs or on social media. Three leaders will also be required to inform police of new music videos and upcoming performances. Recorder Ann Mulligan at Kingston Crown Court issued the three-year CBOs, following an application by the Metropolitan Police’s Trident gang unit. Mic, a rapper and producer form north London, said the order sets an ugly precedent. He said: There is a censorship problem in the country. There are a lot of young musicians in this country whose only outlet for expressing themselves is music. It might be violent but what do you expect in the Britain we’re in right now?

Everything is offensive to somebody these days, so free speech has been cancelled…Judge decides that free speech is no defence for an offensive message and so holocaust denial is now a criminal offence

Read more news.htm at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from independent.co.uk

A woman has been convicted for performing offensive songs that included lyrics denying the Holocaust.Alison Chabloz sang her compositions at a meeting of the far-right London Forum group. A judge at Westminster Magistrates’ Court found Chabloz had violated laws criminalising offence and intended to insult Jewish people. District judge John Zani delayed her sentencing until 14 June but told the court: On the face of it this does pass the custody threshold. Chabloz, a Swiss-British dual national, had uploaded tunes to YouTube including one defining the Nazi death camp Auschwitz as a theme park just for fools and the gas chambers a proven hoax. The songs remain available on YouTube. The songs were partly set to traditional Jewish folk music, with lyrics like: Did the Holocaust ever happen? Was it just a bunch of lies? Seems that some intend to pull the wool over our eyes. Adrian Davies, defending, previously told the judge his ruling would be a landmark one, setting a precedent on the exercise of free speech. But Judge Zani said Chabloz failed by some considerable margin to persuade the court that her right to freedom of speech should provide her with immunity from prosecution. He said: I am entirely satisfied that she will have intended to insult those to whom the material relates. Having carefully considered all evidence received and submissions made, I am entirely satisfied that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. Chabloz was convicted of two counts of causing an offensive, indecent or menacing message to be sent over a public communications network after performing two songs at a London Forum event in 2016. As there wa nothing indecent or menacing in the songs, Chabloz was convicted for an offensive message. See The Britisher for an eloquent and passionate defence of free speech.