What does "publish to the internet" specifically mean - legally .....!
Unless the relative legislation provides an explict definition,
"publish" generally means to communicate to others.
In this instance, it would therefore mean
"to communicate to others by uploading, posting etc to the internet" - posting on this site for example. Depending on the wording of the orders, they may or may not include private communications.
Let's look at the original question from this thread and in particular, the wording the OP quoted from the orders:
I have an
intervention order and the protected persons are my ex and my two children. My IVO says I cannot "publish on the internet, by email or other electronic communication any material about the protected person(s)".
Note the words
"by email or other electronic communication". The intention of this order is clear enough for a blind man locked in a dark room to see it. The word
"email" is explicitly included and is immediately followed by the words
"or other electronic communication".
Emails are private communications, therefore the intent of the order in regard to scope, includes both public and private communications. This therefore rules out posting or uploading to the internet, as well as email, SMS and MMS. The words
"any material about the protected person(s)" is exhaustive in regard to subject matter and therefore rules out ALL electronic communications that are in any way related to the protected person(s).
So for the OP, who wanted to know if he would be in breach of the order if he posted pictures of his kids on Facebook, the answer is a very clear yes - he most definately would be in breach of the order. He can't even email the pictures (zipped or otherwise), or message them using his phone.
EXACTLY what defines the difference between publishing - and a private communication - on the internet....?
A private communication has one or more "explicit" intended recipients. So when you send an email, you dictate who the recipients are. More important though, whilst an email is transmitted through the internet, it is not retained at any point or published in any way so that third parties can see it. The intended audience for an email is therefore
"static". The audience doesn't change, because like a conversation or mailing a letter, sending an email is a single non-persistent event - it happens once and then it's over. An email is therefore a private communication.
Posting on social media is never private. The first reason for this, is that the information is retained indefinately until it's deleted manually, or in some cases, by an atomated process after a certain amount of time has elapsed. So even though a social media post may be intended only for friends, or members of a group, those friends or members can change during the post's lifetime. The intended audience is therefore
"dynamic", in that it can change over time. So due to having a dynamic audience, a post on social media can not be considered a private communication, because it's intended audience can not be explicitly defined in a static way.
To give an example, consider this scenario:
Bob creates a new Facebook profile and sets it up so that only friends can see what is posted on his page.
He adds Joe as a friend and they both post on Bob's profile.
At a later date, Bob adds Sam as a friend and Sam adds comments to those earlier posts.
Joe complains, claiming that those posts were private between Bob and himself.
Does Joe have a case?
The answer is "no". In order for a communication to be private, all parties must reasonably be able to expect to know who the intended parties to the communication are. In this case, Bob has sole control over who can see the posts on his own profile and Joe has no control over this whatsoever. Because the communication is persistent (retained on Bob's profile page) and Bob can change the intended audience at any time, the posts can not be considered private, because an essentential element for a private communication to exist is not present. As such, social media posts are always public.
So the main differences between "publish" and "private communication" relate to "retention and persistence" and "knowledge and consent". A private communication is a non-persistent event that is not retained in a way for others to see or hear unintentionally; and the intended parties are statically defined at the time the communication is made.
Published content on the other hand, is persistent in that it is retained in some form or another enabling other parties to see it in the future; the intended audience is dynamic; and usually only one party has control over who the intended audience is and can change that audience during the lifetime of the communication.
Additionally, the name "social media" itself is also relevant, as the purpose of all social media platforms is to provide a way for people to "share information". Social media in general, is not intended to be used for secure private communications - and it never has been.
A good analogy is postal mail and notice boards. Email is like postal mail - but without the inconvenience of having to queue up at the post office. You can send a letter directly from your letterbox to the recipient's letterbox. It is always considered a private communication because all intended parties to the communication are always explicitly identified.
Social media is like a notice board in a workplace, school, shopping centre, etc. No matter where the board is located, only a limited number of people will be able see it. But ultimately, you don't control who comes into the building or when - that's controlled by the owner or whoever. Therefore, anything put on the notice board, is always considered public, even though the intended audience is limited by the board's location.
Possible exceptions to the rule for social media would be instant messaging and live chats where the participants are invited to join. Those types of communications are intended to be private amongst the participants.
Re the
facebook pages - I blocked everyone associated with her, but she recruited a spy - in the form of the partner of a mate I was staying with - to take screen shots of the privately shared stuff on facebook, and send it to her
This is similar to the "notice board" example, but she could have asked anyone that your friends with to just look at your profile and get the info that way. I'm actually surprised that she risked using someone you were living with - she's not very smart for a cop. But either way, it shows how you don't really have any control at all over who sees your social media posts.
she unlawfully accessed my Gmail account and programmed it to forward emails to her - this fact is obvious from the exhibits in the brief
In NSW, this falls under computer offences in the Crimes Act. I would assume that Victoria has something similar that makes this is a pretty serious criminal offence. If she's a Police officer and you have evidence of this, I'd be reporting it to the corruption watchdog. For Victoria, that would be the
Independent broad-based anti-corruption commission | IBAC
Um.... "She"...... is not a protected person named in the IVO....
there are a lot of females working for vic pol..... So I beg to differ..... unless "About" is anything that resembles a potentially an obscure reference to...."She" who shall not be named....
I totally agree with your principle here, but you're on shaky ground because of your particular circumstances. To breach the order by posting in this forum, it must be reasonable to accept that the people on this forum know who you are talking about without being told. As far as I can tell, there's nothing here that enables me or anyone else to know that, unless someone here knows you or her personally.
But there's no guarantee here, because anyone could stumble across these pages - even through Google. If you signed up to this site using your real name, then anyone who knows either of you could easily see what you have posted and know straight away exactly who you are talking about. So given that you got in trouble for emailing her lawyer (which I think is outright ridiculous by the way), posting here could get you into even more trouble. You need to remember, this site is 100% public - anyone in the world can see what you post, even if they are not a member.
