Unable to load image

Federal government to outlaw doxxing, impose up to seven years' jail for malicious sharing of personal data :marseynullgenocide:

https://old.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/1fejnay/federal_government_to_outlaw_doxxing_impose_up_to/

It follows the personal details of hundreds of Jewish Australians being published online.

What's next?

The government will also introduce its hate speech bill to parliament, but it is not expected to be as strong as initially proposed.

The malicious release of personal data online, known as doxxing, would be outlawed and attract up to seven years in jail under new legislation being introduced to federal parliament on Thursday.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese promised to outlaw the practice after the details of a private WhatsApp group involving hundreds of Jewish Australians were published online in February.

Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus will unveil the details of the new offence as part of broader reforms that he says will bring the Privacy Act into the digital age.

"Australians have got the right to have their privacy respected and when they're asked to hand over their personal data they have a right to expect it will be respected," he said.

"This is an act that was passed in 1988. In many, many ways it's just not fit for the digital age.

"The malicious release of personal data online is something that ought to be criminalised."

The bill will impose a maximum six years' imprisonment for publishing private details such as names, addresses and numbers, with the intent of causing harm.

That will be increased to seven years where a person or group is targeted on the basis of their race, religion, s*x, sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, disability, nationality or ethnic origin.

Australians will also be given the right to sue for damages if they have been the victim of a serious invasion of privacy, with the creation of a new statutory tort.

Mr Dreyfus said additional protections will be introduced for minors.

"Children are very often not able to detect when their privacy is being invaded, when they're being manipulated in quite the way that adults can guard against those things and that's why we're looking to develop a children's online privacy code that's going to impose requirements on the social media platforms on digital providers," he said.

The reforms are the first tranche of a promised modernisation of the Privacy Act with several other phases unlikely to be introduced before the federal election, due in May.

Privacy advocates have called for the removal of a clause exempting small businesses with an annual turnover of $3 million or less from being required to protect personal information and disclose how it is used.

That change is not included in this phase.

Mr Dreyfus will also introduce the government's hate speech bill on Thursday but that legislation is expected to be weaker than the government's original proposal.

191
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Reported by:
  • Fresh_Start : Doxxing BIPOCKiller4000 is a punishable offense? I support this law.

This will be mostly irrelevant because nearly all "doxxing" is just consolidating information from across the web. If someone signs up to a website with his real name next to BIPOCKiller4000 is it really an invasion of privacy to connect the two? Australia will say yes because its a shithole but most countries that matter wont let this see court.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The main issue with the law is that these people can now bring you to court for doxxing even if there isn't really a case against you which allows news outlets to slander you and forces you to waste your time on a meaningless court case and potentially go to jail if the judge is feeling particularly corrupt that day. Source: my favorite australian youtuber friendlyjordies :)

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Only if they doxx you as well and that would be illegal :marseyevilgrin:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

in some states the media cant name you if youre rhe victim of a crime, so its best to always claim.victimhood if the option os available to you

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This will be mostly irrelevant because nearly all "doxxing" is just consolidating information from across the web.

Okay why is the person consolidating that information If the consolidation is being done in bad faith then it should be illegal

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This comment was made in bad faith. Enjoy prison stalker child.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Surely the motive behind why someone is consolidating this info should matter yes?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Oh youre serious.

Yes, intent does matter a lot when it comes to legality of these things, but I think it comes to a debate over what is a reasonable expectation of privacy on the Internet. To make a real world example, everyone would agree that you have some right of privacy in a bathroom and if I snuck up in a backyard and peaked at you showering, then that is obviously wrong and illegal. But if your bathroom is facing the street, on the first floor, and has no blinders, it then wouldnt be illegal for anyone to see you because its completely unreasonable to have any privacy in a situation. I personally view putting things on the internet as consent to be documented and remembered by any who decide to do so, and if you make your information so easily accessible I dont think you really have any expectation of privacy anymore.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

But if your bathroom is facing the street, on the first floor, and has no blinders, it then wouldnt be illegal for anyone to see you because its completely unreasonable to have any privacy in a situation.

Okay but it's one thing to have that info out there and another for someone to go along pick through every single post out of thousands one made and gathering it all together. That's not a bathroom facing the street that's more like they've got a disco ball in their bathroom reflecting little bits of their nude self in many different random directions and you come along and use a bunch of mirrors to focus the image in one spot.

I personally view putting things on the internet as consent to be documented and remembered by any who decide to do so, and if you make your information so easily accessible I dont think you really have any expectation of privacy anymore.

Okay but that's ignoring the intent WHY is the person documenting them?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It doesnt matter why, dont want people to know shit about you? Dont post it online. Really simple.

Doxxing laws should only apply if personal info was aquired through hacker magic means.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It doesnt matter why,

Sure it does, intent maters for multiple laws it's why not every crime between two races is a hate crime

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

And Im sure it isnt arbitrarily decided by the judge what intent there was :marseyclueless:

Even then, intent doesnt matter at all. My whole point is that anything you post online for everyone to see is fair game, and its not even doxxing when someone collects this information.

Doxxing should only be for actual crimes, eg when someone hacks into whatever messenger app you use to find out info about you.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm fine with this if the rules are the same for "journ*lists"

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

My main point is that even if its done with malicious intent, which can be very hard to prove, getting this information by just doing "normal" things like googling someones name, or just like remembering information tat you yourself have posted, shouldnt be illegal. If you take a hundred different nude photos of yourself, each a different part of your body, and post then all on the internet one by one, is it really not expected that someone will glue all the pieces together and create a full nude picture? An example from this website can be frozen. While I feel bad for her and I think she didnt "deserve" do be doxed the way she was, the amount of information she put out there about herself made it an inevitability.

I think youre focusing on the morality of doxxing, which is something Im not arguing about. Doxxing is immoral. No argument from me, but the idea that you might be able to get in trouble just for saying "Hey I know you, you did xyz on this website awhile ago" is a little silly imo.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

which can be very hard to prove

Not really, intent is proven all the time in court

is it really not expected that someone will glue all the pieces together and create a full nude picture?

Whoever is putting all that work into making a whole photo is a fricking freak, yes that's weird and regular people wouldn't think that is normal.

the idea that you might be able to get in trouble just for saying "Hey I know you, you did xyz on this website awhile ago" is a little silly imo.

What is the purpose for saying that, you keep sidestepping intent.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Not really, intent is proven all the time in court

Proving malicious intent is really hard/impossible for these kind of crimes with anonymous people.

Whoever is putting all that work into making a whole photo is a fricking freak,

What is the purpose for saying that, you keep sidestepping intent.

My point is that oftentimes people divulge enough information to where its not a lot of work at all to dox someone. If you, as a doxer, are not accessing information that the person published with the intention on keeping private, then I think at worst your "doxing" is just being an butthole, which shouldnt be punished with jail time. Hacking someones accounts, or accessing their files would show significant malicious intent, but I dont see why it cant be considered harassment/stalking.

I dont like vaguely written laws like this because they can, and will, be used by the influential to shut down anyone trying to whistleblow. When the crime is sharing "personal information" basically anything could fall under that label.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

They are goofy ahhh people from ohio on god

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

no. It's not a crime. If you dont want your personal information on the internet, don't publish it on the internet.

"doxxing" is a term that comes from hacker communities with the implication that the person getting doxxed would also be arrested for (cyber)crime associated with their pseudonym. Read "doxxing" = "snitching". Remember when the internet was for nerds, and the common wisdom was to never put your real name and address on the internet? yeah back then, before attention whores became the dominant userbase of the internet.

The idea of "doxxing" someone who goes around on the internet posting their name and address, etc. is ridiculous. Even in the old days that would be referred to as "doxxing yourself" or "self-dox".

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

no. It's not a crime.

Well yeah that's the point of them making it illegal dummy

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

So many unnecessarily complicated laws, it's really fricking simple: if I don't like it, then it should be illegal. If I like it, it should be legal. Capiche?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If someone signs up to a website with his real name next to BIPOCKiller4000 is it really an invasion of privacy to connect the two?

:chadyes:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

is it really an invasion of privacy

yes

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

>This will be mostly irrelevant because nearly all "doxxing" is just consolidating information from across the web.

I mean, yes but it's still feasible to stem its propogation, in the same ways that it's feasible to stop defamation or revenge porn. The 90s vision of the internet just casually routing around censorship attempts has not panned out.

>If someone signs up to a website with his real name next to BIPOCKiller4000 is it really an invasion of privacy to connect the two?

Courts will figure this out.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

authoritarian shithole

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

MFs be posting their government names and gps pings on social media, but if you link to it? Straight to jail. :marseymugshot:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The funniest type of peope that act this way are the ones who become schizo by wrapping xeir phones in tinfoil while using xeir real name in gmail no less. Or the boomers in 8kun.top that posted in the /q/ board to be anonymous, but xey put xeir email on the part where it says "email" when it is totally unnecessary

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Why are you linking it?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It was done in bad faith

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

lol of course it's an angloid country :marseydicklet:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

We crave the boot :marseybootlicker2: this is what happens when we're subjects rather than citizens

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Another banger /h/drama post. Upmarseyd, motherlover!

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm sure this will be enforced consistently :marseyclueless:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

"this b-word stupid." goes to jail

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Wasn't this done by an NYT reporter?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Butt then how will cbuds be held accountable? Freedom of speech iant freedom from consequences!

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.