Still working to recover. Please don't edit quite yet.
|A concurrent version of this article exists: Troll-faction perspective|
Trollcrime is a neologism used by Internet trolls to make them appear that they are doing something constructive. The term is derived from the thoughtcrime to create a negative power word for resisting the anti-social behaviour of trolls.
As one might expect, this reliance on framing the issue means that the best evidence that trollcrime is actually offensive comes from the very evidence they attempt to frame.
On January 5th, 2006, U.S. president George W. Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison. Response from Trollers was that "The new law has been criticized as an obvious violation of every American's First Amendment right to free speech."
alleged UK 'anti-trollcrime' measures
A man who posted racist messages on a UK website set up in memory of murdered black teenager Anthony Walker has been jailed for two years and eight months. Neil Martin, 30, of Maghull, posted the offensive remarks just days after the 18-year-old student was killed with an ice axe in Huyton, Merseyside.
He pleaded guilty at Liverpool Crown Court to publishing material intended or likely to stir up racial hatred. Judge Henry Globe QC, the Recorder of Liverpool, told Martin he had "trespassed and intruded on the grief of the Walker family". "The intention of the website was innocent, honourable and well motivated," he said.
"You accessed that website and you abused its use. You posted highly abusive, insulting and racist messages on the site."
There are various cases of Canadian postings being used as evidence in criminal cases based on hate speech laws.
- Content from this article's page history
- Internet troll
- anti-social behaviour
- sysop vandalism (a form of trolling by those in power)
- Wikipedia:Online_journalism#Legal_issues: Brief but seemingly fairly balanced portrayal of an unfortunate case highlighting, roughly speaking, issues from both sides: the happy haters and those who see themselves as their victims