http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2013/08/07/ns-cyberbullying-law-rehtaeh.html
2nd link on google, but there's plenty of them.

To me that seems like you need to listen closer .. he first said yeah or something to that effect, then came back on that.

They purposely recorded him and convinced him to do humiliating things to publicly display his humiliation

Responsibility is different from legal obligation.

Kind of like those Australian radio DJs who made that prank call to that English nurse.

To me that seems like you need to listen closer .. he first said yeah or something to that effect, then came back on that.

could you be interested in a loan? with just a small collateral?

That ended pretty well indeed

Wow, that kind of hostility is uncalled for in this civil environment.

He comprimised his Morals because of greed. noone forced him into anything.
but were the ones with the problem right?

Wow, that kind of hostility is uncalled for in this civil environment.

Cool story bro, but that's not a law stating that you cant make fun of gullible idiots, which is what you seem to be saying.

He comprimised his Morals because of greed. noone forced him into anything.
but were the ones with the problem right?

"No, you do not have my permission".

This. But this reminds me of something else, actually.

Have you ever watched Big Brother??

Do you think the producers of that show should be charged with bullying? It's the same thing, making people jump through hoops of self-humiliation for prizes and the like. None of the contestants are forced to do anything, they always have an option to get out of it at any time. No one is holding them there against their will, they are there of their own accord.

The same applies with the guy in this recording. It's just another episode of Big Brother.

Does it matter?

Does it matter if someone explicitly tells you you do not have their permission to publicly release a recording of their voice, then you do it anyway? Yes, yes it matters.

How come at the end of the recording then, they say "by the way we've been recording this. Do we have your permission to publish it" he then clearly say no, they then say "so we have your permission" which again he says no, now it's published.

To me that seems like:
1. He didn't know it was being recorded, otherwise he wouldn't have needed to be told at this point.
2. He clearly stated his refusal to allow the publishing of the recording.

At least over here, you'd be in serious hot water for publishing voice recordings that you were explicitly told was not authorised.

I'm saying that laws preventing cyber bullying are getting tougher. This is cyber bullying.
You can blame the victim all you want, that just makes you as bad as the bullies.

It's because of pubbies like those and other scum alike internet gets more and more controlled, countries set more and more laws about and at some point some have the balls to make things happen.
This reminds me that kid in jail not a long time ago for bullying another kid and his stupid nerd friend making youtube idiot speeches about freedom and respect when he had no idea what he was talking about and specially about those two words.

What this kind or thread reminds me is that Internet is not controlled enough with RL consequences, but we'll get there at some point and sooner the better, on top this will generate business/money thus a must do asap.

Well it didn't end in anyone being charged.

Except the big brother guys sign contract to accept what they are doing, and get paid a shockingly large amount of money to allow both the act and the publication of the recording.

No, he didn't He said "No" which was spoken over by one of the Erotia1 guys, who then said "So we have your permission" to which he responded "No, you do not have my permission".
Go ahead, go listen again. Run a filter if you can't hear it through the noise, but he clearly said "No" twice.

They also didn't bully anyone. They made a prank call which invoked a terrible set of circumstances. Had they called up and got her to humiliate herself, then published the recording against her will they'd have been charged.

Why?

It's a criminal offence to make a voice recording both in the US and here in Australia without the permission of the person being recorded. Here in Australia that comes under the covert surveillance act. In US not sure. Fines / Jail time.

Both have nothing to do with the tort of defamation, which is a civil offence - reparations.

Nevertheless the guy was stupid.

Just remember, scamming new characters is frowned upon. If a new character is scammed, please file a support ticket.