Mueller Time, baby! This time someone in authority is going to actually arrest and imprison some rich asshole, for real! We promise! Look at these memes!!!
I don't think there is anything false with what they said, it's just stating the punishment for the crime. Now, whether those punishments actually happen is the question.
We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art, and very often in our art, the art of words.
Yeah, people are acting like this is up to chance - rich people throw money at their problems, and so long as someone is willing to spend their time catching it instead of doing their job, it works. It's going to work. The 5 year sentence is for poor people they want to get rid of, not for rich people they want to profit from.
I wish Joanne had gone the Enya route and finished Harry Potter and the Writing Quality of Diminishing Returns, disappeared with her wealth into the highlands, did some occasional projects, and just never spoke again. Maybe some occasional rumors would pop up about her having a panda ranch that she kept for demolition derbys or something weird. She can go suck a railroad spike.
Seriously. She has been such a massive disappointment. The fact that she feels like she has to be actively hateful, makes it all the worse. Just shut the help up and enjoy your gobs and gobs of money.
I'm sure I'll regret asking this, but what is it she has actually done? Every time I've asked people seem to spout off how she's pure evil, said evil things, and then backed it up with nothing. The only thing I think I've ever seen from her is that she wants to protect woman.
Five years is the maximum sentence, which a person with no prior convictions should easily be able to avoid. Even if the case was brought against a regular person, I doubt there would be jail time. Musk and Rowling can naturally afford the best lawyers, and Rowling has gone radio silent from what I heard. So, fine is easily possible, but jail time is highly unlikely.
Literally, they don't produce anything. They would probably accumulate more wealth while in prison. In my ideal society the judge would hit them for a percentage of their net worth.
Well the way laws tend to work they scale to consequence.
Like think about speeding in a school zone. You get caught by a cop doing it it's a fine. Nobody is going to jail.
But say you speed and hit someone and cause injury. You probably face big fines or a few days in jail or community service.
But then imagine you are speeding in a school zone and you hit and kill a kid. That's not ruled a no fault accidental death as it would be if you weren't speeding. Because you broke the smaller law you get the upgrade to manslaughter because you were found criminally at fault.
Cyberbullying applies the same logic. As long as there were no criminal harms and measurable damages it's a little fine to remind you that that's not cool. But the more recordable damages the cyberbullying causes the more you are on the hook. If you are a person with millions of followers chances are you have a lot of potential destructive power and it is wiser to keep your facts straight and your nose clean when it comes to calls to action to harrass someone who has comparatively very little ability to defend themselves.
How does the jurisdiction even work there? A UK citizen and a SA/Canada/US citizen get prosecuted for cyberbullying of an Algerian citizen? Don't get me wrong, they deserve it, but this feels like a "careful what you wish for" type of thing.
It's almost like these borders we have are stupid and arbitrary and instead we should have a global system of justice to handle these cross border crimes.
You're advocating people be tried for speech crimes by an international body that they didn't vote for and can't fire through an electoral process. Seems like a great idea that totally won't backfire.
Even arguably the two most similar cultures in the world, the United States and Canada, have enough disagreements on how government should work that there wouldn't be massive support on either side for them to merge.
Not to mention 1A has worked against Rowling in the past (she threatens libel lawsuits that are valid in the UK, but US doesn't extradite for stuff that would be considered free speech there.)
Ever heard of the lèse-majesté laws in Thailand? Now imagine a dictator able to use that to silence critics globally that are "cyberbullying" them. We already see it with countries filing bogus Interpol requests to harass dissident diaspora members. And sure you could have an independent body, but then that is subject to politics and capture.