Talk:AMP v Persons Unknown
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 25 January 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
January 2012
editWho uploaded the photos to BitTorrent?
- There is some reliable sourcing here. The exact sequence of events is unknown, but the torrent was apparently uploaded to "a Swedish file-sharing website" (a particular one springs to mind here) and then “her father's business public relations team were contacted and allegedly threatened and blackmailed about some images but it was not specified that the images were of her”.
Please bear in mind that any attempt to identify the woman involved will be removed on WP:BLPNAME grounds and could lead to a WP:BLOCK if added repeatedly. The article should be about the legal issues raised by the court case, not outing the woman. Please also note that any user with a UK IP address who attempts to download this material could face legal action. Read the court document at EWHC 3454 (TCC) for details.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:47, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
This case has been covered by all major UK newspapers such as the Daily Telegraph, the Daily Times and the Guardian. So obviously this topic is notable and the sources and their content is not trivial. And I also agree that the article should be about the legal case and about the woman involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.211.83.5 (talk) 03:00, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Here are some reliable sources. Now please can we stop discussing the deletion of this article.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/9005712/Woman-wins-court-order-to-stop-explicit-photos-being-shared-online.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.211.83.5 (talk) 03:18, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Here are some more sources which could make the subject of this article notable:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/01/12/amp_bittorrent_injunction/
http://www.griffinlaw.co.uk/2012/01/11/griffin-law-makes-law-again/
http://www.chillingeffects.org— Preceding unsigned comment added by Prachursharma (talk • contribs) 03:43, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Making the article about the legal case and not about the woman involved is easier said than done. Some of the sources above give information that make the name and/or the torrent material relatively easy to find. Not every court case meets WP:GNG, and although this case has picked up some media coverage, it is nowhere near being as famous as CTB v News Group Newspapers. This case does not involve a footballer or television personality trying to cover up a relationship that they should not have had in the first place, which was the root cause of the 2011 British privacy injunctions controversy. The judge was right to grant the woman anonymity in this case, and media coverage should respect this even if it is not directly covered by UK law. The most notable feature of the case is that it is believed to be the first time that a court has made downloading and seeding a specific BitTorrent (protocol) file illegal. This is not a freedom of speech case, as blackmail and harassment are excluded from freedom of speech provisions.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:33, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Article expanded
editThe article was expanded, mainly because of the difficulty in finding another suitable place for the material. The phrase "subpoenas were delivered to Google to compel it to censor her real name from its search results." in this edit is inaccurate. Since AMP took the photos, she would have been assumed automatically to be the copyright holder, regardless of whether they were sexually explicit or routine photos. If a website used them without her permission, she was perfectly within her rights to file a DMCA complaint. This is not censorship, and the same thing happened with mobile phone photos of Scarlett Johansson in September 2011.Scarlett Johansson photos: How did they end up online? BBC News.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:31, 27 January 2012 (UTC)