However, although the "Vikileaks" poster may well have legal problems of their own. They were at least smart enough not to make criminal threats like Anonymous.
Are you related to Barack Obama or are you Barack Obama?
PLEASE READ AND SHARE THIS!!! The People Strike Back at Vic Toews!
- Thread starter gilgamesh01
- Start date
Is there anything illegal about exposing or threatening to expose personal information about someone as long as that information was legally obtained and the method used to obtain it is disclosed? You could call it blackmail or you could call it negotiating or politics.
Read the law for yourself (#9). Anonymous say we have information about Wigglee, we found it by digging through records at the courthouse (or if you prefer your garbage cans at the curb) unless Wigglee does what we demand (take your pick) by sunset tonight we will release the information - think it meets the elements of Extortion in Canada, was there a threat (do it or else) was there induction or attempt at induction to take a particular action (do what we demand)?
Last edited:
If you are unable to distinguish between the right of the public to know about convictions and this extortion...you really need some remedial civics and reasoning lessons.
However, that is not what either they or you actually mean. If Doogood says to themself it is outrageous that Spillslick wants to construct a landfill right next to this pristine river, I will release legally obtained documents about another landfill they operate in another Province which has caused extensive groundwater pollution. You are correct there is no crime.
However, if instead Doogood posts a video on Youtube or writes to Spillslick and says unless you stop permitting and/or construction of the landfill I will release information about an affair the Vice-Chairman of Spillslick had five years ago - sorry but that is extortion.
Nothing wrong with making the FACTS public - if that's what they actually did. But this business of attacking a public servant is idiotic.
And lots of people know about it seven years ago - it was in the papers and everything! Just no idiots back then hiding behind the internet.
That's why Anonymous is anonymous - because what they do is illegal. Their protest against Bill 30 may be for a worthy cause, but they are cyber-bullies, anarchists, terrorists, etc. and THIS bill would spell the end of THEIR illegal tactics, which include hacking into private or secure networks. What fucking hypocrites.
The threat is the release of info that is prejudicial to the victim, regardless of whether it is a court document available to the public. It's not like it's already posted publicly and in the public domain in the absence of the threat.
Furthermore, there are two things at play here in favour of the citizen: 1) he is given every opportunity to file the taxes with ample notice 2) ignorance of the law is no excuse - the policy of the government to publish convictions IS in the public domain (and readily accessible). It is not a threat made to file or pay your taxes.
The expression 'The People' is an American one btw, not a Canadian one. Anonymous does not represent law-abiding Canadian citizens. You also answered your own question: If a threat is made to force someone to do something, it is extortion.
Example: If someone knows you hobbied and forces you to pay 'silence money' lest they send pictures to your wife, that is extortion. Whether it's pics or information that is prejudicial or harmful to your reputation, it is tantamount to using force. No different than the mob does in blackmailing politicians (and possibly J. Edgar Hoover himself), etc.
Gigla, check out this thread, if you`re really passionate and care to hear both sides debating this.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?372642-Hacker-groups-Anonymous-threatens-Toews.-)
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?372642-Hacker-groups-Anonymous-threatens-Toews.-)
Anonymous is not asking for money they are demanding privacy rights on behalf of us all...if they are criminals , they are in the Robin Hood style....they expose and hinder the corporate greed and political corruption that so dominates our society and which many of you (such as oddsox, aardvark and gpideal) regularly yet anonymously defend on terb.
Same dif..... its the old Us and Them mentality either way. They scream thats unethical all the while they're unethical. At least I Toews can be voted out, and the laws can be amended. I can't do jack about my CC's info being dumped online because they didn't like the terms of service of a company that they likely don't use anyway.
Cheers!
Cheers!
Anonymous is anonymous, so you can't readily lay charges, however, there have been recent cases where an ISP was forced to reveal the online perpetrator's identity of libelous statements (you cannot use an internet service for illegal purposes, and nor can an ISP allow it to be a vehicle lest they be charged too), yet Anonymous may be using an offshore server in a different legal jurisdiction which would limit the Crown's powers to prosecute.
There is no justification for Anonymous' illegal act, no matter how offensive the proposed bill may be, in a society based on the rule of law.
Exposing a bad law by raising public awareness is a good thing. Demanding a change by way of a threat is criminal.
Extortion doesn't need to involve money - Eg. Vito Corleone forced that movie producer to hire his godson for the part in a picture. He didn't ask for a penny.
There is no Robin Hood defence in the Criminal Code.
Pay attention! None of us are defending this Bill as it's stated.
