Nova Scotia's New Cyberbullying Law Will 'Make Bullies Of Us All'

from the 'fixing'-something-by-breaking-it dept

Another anti-cyberbullying ordinance has been rolled out in response to a tragedy. This time it’s Nova Scotia enacting a new law aimed at combating the sort of behavior that resulted in the suicide of Rehtaeh Parsons.

Parsons’ story is particularly horrible. Cyberbullying was only part of the problem. The much larger issue was the actual crimes committed against Parsons, criminal acts that already have laws on the books to address them. Parsons was allegedly gang-raped and harassed by her rapists. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police conducted a yearlong investigation into the case but ultimately decided there was a lack of sufficient evidence to pursue rape charges. (Conversely, activist “group” Anonymous claimed to have solved the case in two hours, using a variety of gathered information, including the EXIF data that the RCMP seemingly overlooked.)

Rather belatedly, the RCMP HAS decided to pursue child pornography charges against two of the alleged assailants, but this will be of little comfort to Parsons’ family. Unfortunately, this new law (the “Cyber Safety Act” or Bill 61) won’t do much to address the sort of criminal behavior Parsons suffered through. Instead, the bill will likely end up “making bullies of us all,” according to Jessie Brown at MacLean’s.

Rape, assault, harassment: these are crimes with established parameters. All of them could also be called “bullying.” They could also be described as “mean,” and I suppose we could enact a law against being mean. But I’d rather have laws against specific crimes, rather than against vast swaths of vaguely defined human behaviour. Ultimately, bullying is in the eye of the bullied.

Here’s where these laws fall apart. Instead of an objective standard, the accused are held to a subjective standard, one applied by the accuser and enforced by the law. Where most criminal activities are clearly defined by certain actions, cyberbullying (and regular bullying) have no clear definition.

The bill works this way: an accuser files a claim with the court, requesting a protection order against the accused. A judge decides whether the behavior detailed meets the definition of “cyberbullying” set by this law. The definition of cyerbullying is broad and vague, the end result of overly-cautious lawmakers addressing a problem with no clear boundaries and doing so under the self-imposed pressure of needing to “do something.”

The definition of cyberbullying, in this particular bill, includes “any electronic communication” that ”ought reasonably be expected” to “humiliate” another person, or harm their “emotional well-being, self-esteem or reputation.”

If this is the standard, I don’t know a person who isn’t a cyberbully.

Here’s what can happen to the accused should the judge grant the protection order. (This process, by the way, occurs without any input from the accused — it’s solely between the judge and accuser.)

  • The police can seize your computers and phone.
  • Your Internet connection can be shut off.
  • You can be ordered to stop using electronic devices entirely.
  • Your Internet Service Provider or Internet companies, such as Facebook, can be compelled to fork over all your data to the police.
  • You can be gagged by the court and prohibited from mentioning your accuser online.
  • If you violate any of these orders, you’ll face stiff fines and up to two years of jail time. At this point, your accuser can sue you in civil court.

So, the law basically makes it possible for anyone’s unfortunate online comments to result in a civil suit or a prison sentence. The process isn’t adversarial at any point where some input or context might make a difference. Presumably, the accused can defend themselves once in civil court, but that will only mitigate the damages without having any effect on previous criminal charges or punishments already enacted.

Even worse, the law opens up parents to be targeted by civil suits for the bullying activities of their children and pushes school administrators to enact zero-tolerance policies backed by mandatory suspensions for bullying behavior — even if it occurs off-campus. While there’s something to be said for forcing parents to take responsibilities for the actions of their children, in practice this becomes nothing more than presenting parents as a “soft target” for civil suits, allowing the accuser to bypass the accused entirely if success against the parents seems more promising.

Responding to a bullying incident by lowering the bar and raising the consequences is completely the wrong answer, no matter how tragic the incident. This new law has the potential to criminalize plenty of non-bullying activity and may actually encourage abuse by anyone who sees the possibilities provided by the law’s unintended consequences — an easy route to shut down and prosecute anyone who irritates them in any way.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Nova Scotia's New Cyberbullying Law Will 'Make Bullies Of Us All'”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
31 Comments
Ninjasays:

Here’s what can happen to the accused should the judge grant the protection order. (This process, by the way, occurs without any input from the accused — it’s solely between the judge and accuser.)

Basically it allows for lawful bullying since the language is broad. Not to mention that the bullied may feel empowered with all these stuff and virtually make the life of the bully a living hell effectively becoming the bully. This case is rather extreme but think of other cyberbullying cases where there was only verbal/moral harassment: what if the tables were turned and the original bully suicided? Would it be fair?

The simple answer is no. Punishment has to be proportional to the harm caused as ruled by a jury, judges and experts. Putting the power of effectively making “justice” in the hands of any random person (including real bullying victims) is not justice.

It will be abused like crazy. And a ton of innocent kids and stupid teenagers will suffer a much greater harm than bullying may ever produce. But alas, it’s for the children!

Anonymoussays:

There’s no way in hell this will last longer than a couple months before it’s stomped down under section 2, and probably one or more of sections 7, 8 and 9. The questions are how much damage the Nova Scotia police will do before it’s stomped down, and whether the issue has enough momentum that the Nova Scotia government will break out the notwithstanding clause in response.

Anonymoussays:

Let's look at this closely

The definition of cyberbullying, in this particular bill, includes ?any electronic communication? that ?ought reasonably be expected? to ?humiliate? another person, or harm their ?emotional well-being, self-esteem or reputation.?

I find stupidity (in all its myriad forms) offensive. I find it upsetting. Being upset harms my emotional well-being. It makes my blood pressure go up. It makes my stomach churn. It makes me want to reach for scotch at 9:17 AM.

Given that all these things are true, could I then use this mechanism to get all the stupid people thrown offline?

Well, then…

Anonymoussays:

The definition of cyberbullying, in this particular bill, includes ?any electronic communication? that ?ought reasonably be expected? to ?humiliate? another person, or harm their ?emotional well-being, self-esteem or reputation.?

So if someone says something that causes you to face palm they have bullied you by causing you actual harm.

Eponymous Cowardsays:

Fortunately it limits itself to just cyberbullying...

Imagine all the harm done if it targeted all bullying:

-Screaming profanities at a fellow motorist on the highway means having the law take your car away and/or the right to travel.

-Putting up a sign on your property that distresses your neighbors will have the law take possesion of your home.

-Make a bad joke at work that accidently humiliates a coworker and you’ll never be allowed to work by law anywhere ever again.

-Live your life in such a manor to cause the displeasure of others, especialy the law, will have your living priviledges revoked permanately.

btrussellsays:

Re: Re: Fortunately it limits itself to just cyberbullying...

Just use Twitter. They will remove any offensive post.

“Twitter issues new rules to control abusive language after storm of misogynist messages

The company also promised to devote more staff to weed out offending messages.

In a series of statements posted to Twitter, General Manager Tony Wang issued his own apology ?to the women who have experienced abuse on Twitter and for what they have gone through.?

Wang said in a tweet that the new anti-abuse policy will apply worldwide.”
http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/08/04/twitter-issues-new-rules-to-control-abusive-language-after-storm-of-misogynist-messages/

Anonymoussays:

Ever think this rule was put in place for one thing and one thing only – to remove anyone that criticizes those in power in Nova Scotia (and of course their pay-masters in various entertainment industries).

Comes the MPAA – hey we think that your comment about “I don’t like the MPAA because they are all cacky fingered asses” was humiliating therefore we get to take everything you own and make you fight to get it back…Yay! for the totalitarian state.

Goddess of the Nightsays:

Law being used to target political dissidents

This law is already being abused. I wrote a feminist article about a man who sexually assaulted me and linked to his online profiles, all within the public domain and got CyberSCAN come to my house accusing me of cyberbullying because it made the guy look bad. This law is authoritarian, pure and simple and violates the human rights of Nova Scotians. Thinking of moving to another province just to get away from this shit.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Report this ad??|??Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...
Older Stuff
12:25 Australian Privacy Commissioner Says 7-Eleven Broke Privacy Laws By Scanning Customers' Faces At Survey Kiosks (6)
10:50 Missouri Governor Doubles Down On 'View Source' Hacking Claim; PAC Now Fundraising Over This Bizarrely Stupid Claim (45)
10:45 Daily Deal: The All-in-One Microsoft, Cybersecurity, And Python Exam Prep Training Bundle (0)
09:43 Want To Understand Why U.S. Broadband Sucks? Look At Frontier Communications In Wisconsin, West Virginia (8)
05:36 Massachusetts College Decides Criticizing The Chinese Government Is Hate Speech, Suspends Conservative Student Group (71)
19:57 Le Tigre Sues Barry Mann To Stop Copyright Threats Over Song, Lights Barry Mann On Fire As Well (21)
16:07 Court Says City Of Baltimore's 'Heckler's Veto' Of An Anti-Catholic Rally Violates The First Amendment (15)
13:37 Two Years Later, Judge Finally Realizes That A CDN Provider Is Not Liable For Copyright Infringement On Websites (21)
12:19 Chicago Court Gets Its Prior Restraint On, Tells Police Union Head To STFU About City's Vaccine Mandate (158)
10:55 Verizon 'Visible' Wireless Accounts Hacked, Exploited To Buy New iPhones (8)
10:50 Daily Deal: The MacOS 11 Course (0)
07:55 Suing Social Media Sites Over Acts Of Terrorism Continues To Be A Losing Bet, As 11th Circuit Dumps Another Flawed Lawsuit (11)
02:51 Trump Announces His Own Social Network, 'Truth Social,' Which Says It Can Kick Off Users For Any Reason (And Already Is) (100)
19:51 Facebook AI Moderation Continues To Suck Because Moderation At Scale Is Impossible (26)
16:12 Content Moderation Case Studies: Snapchat Disables GIPHY Integration After Racist 'Sticker' Is Discovered (2018) (11)
13:54 Arlo Makes Live Customer Service A Luxury Option (8)
12:05 Delta Proudly Announces Its Participation In The DHS's Expanded Biometric Collection Program (5)
11:03 LinkedIn (Mostly) Exits China, Citing Escalating Demands For Censorship (14)
10:57 Daily Deal: The Python, Git, And YAML Bundle (0)
09:37 British Telecom Wants Netflix To Pay A Tax Simply Because Squid Game Is Popular (32)
06:41 Report: Client-Side Scanning Is An Insecure Nightmare Just Waiting To Be Exploited By Governments (35)
20:38 MLB In Talks To Offer Streaming For All Teams' Home Games In-Market Even Without A Cable Subscription (10)
15:55 Appeals Court Says Couple's Lawsuit Over Bogus Vehicle Forfeiture Can Continue (15)
13:30 Techdirt Podcast Episode 301: Scarcity, Abundance & NFTs (0)
12:03 Hollywood Is Betting On Filtering Mandates, But Working Copyright Algorithms Simply Don't Exist (66)
10:45 Introducing The Techdirt Insider Discord (4)
10:40 Daily Deal: The Dynamic 2021 DevOps Training Bundle (0)
09:29 Criminalizing Teens' Google Searches Is Just How The UK's Anti-Cybercrime Programs Roll (19)
06:29 Canon Sued For Disabling Printer Scanners When Devices Run Out Of Ink (41)
20:51 Copyright Law Discriminating Against The Blind Finally Struck Down By Court In South Africa (7)
More arrow