by Mike Masnick
Thu, May 22nd 2008 6:48am
We've been mocking various attempts to get laws passed that would make it illegal for criminals to post evidence of their crimes on YouTube. This makes absolutely no sense -- as you're basically telling criminals "stop giving us the evidence we need to convict you." If the criminals are so dumb as to hand over such evidence, shouldn't the police and gov't officials be happy about it? Now, in a rather extreme example of this, the city council for Leeds, in the UK, has banned a man they refer to as one of the city's "dumbest criminals" from posting any more evidence to YouTube. In fact, the City Council even seems to recognize how helpful the guy has been: "He has handed us the evidence against him on a plate. In the last three years, we have seen a 32 per cent reduction in crime in Leeds. If more criminals were as obliging, the city would be even safer." So why would you ban him from uploading such evidence?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- UK Surveillance Oversight Board Says It's All Cool When GCHQ Hacks Basically Anyone
- UK Court Tells Online Mapping Company It's Not Illegal For Google To Also Offer Online Maps
- Judge Blocks Release Of Anti-Abortion Videos As The Arbiter Of Journalism
- UK Investigative Agencies Want To Be Able To Send Warrants To US Companies
- YouTube Wins This Round In Germany In The Stupid Neverending War With GEMA Over Streaming Rates