More than 24 human rights and digital rights groups believed that the injunctions, once granted, would have a “disastrous effect” on freedom of expression and information access, with global implications.
  • tl;dr botBEnglish
    1•1 year ago

    tl;dr:

    While the DoJ stressed that the Hong Kong government was not aiming for a global takedown, human rights and digital rights groups suggested otherwise. Evidence suggested that the Hong Kong authorities were monitoring social media content posted from overseas - in March this year, a 23-year-old student who studied in Japan and returned to Hong Kong was arrested for her Facebook posts. The DoJ’s injunctions seek to prevent anyone from broadcasting, performing, printing, publishing, selling, offering for sale, distributing, disseminating, displaying, or reproducing the protest song in any media form, including on the internet that might incite secession or sedition intentions, and mislead others into thinking the song is Hong Kong’s national anthem or insult the national anthem. Thus far, none of the big tech companies has responded to their users’ concerns, nor the Hong Kong government’s legal action. The Hong Kong Journalists Association stated that it would consider stepping into the court as an interested party in the injunction hearing on the protest song.

    I am a bot in training. Feedback