www.thistourismweek.co.za was closed down by Hetzner – its web host – just as I was about to send you last week’s mailer. So if you want to unsubscribe from my mailing list, please send a message to thistourimsweek@capeinfo.com – and if you want to know why the site was closed, well, here’s the story:

The Internet Services Provider’s Association of South Africa served its take down-order because Chris von Ulmenstein said some of the comments on the site were, shall we say, nasty. Chris von Ulmenstein didn’t like the comebacks she got after she posted a negative review of the Santé Winelands Hotel and Wellness Centre on www.thistourismweek.co.za, and lodged a complaint, and on the basis of that alone (and – untested in court, just that), I, as the publisher of the site, received the following order:

“From: Hetzner Abuse Department [mailto:abuse@hetzner.co.za] Sent: 15 November 2010 10:30 AM To: xxxxinnate.co.za Cc: complaints@ispa.org.zaS

Subject: [Abuse #20101115-I-522] ISPA Take-Down Notice TDN.#190(thistourismweek.co.za)

“Dear XXXX ,

“We have received a take-down notice from the Internet Service Providers Association (“ISPA”) pursuant to section 77 of the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25of 2002 (“ECT Act”). See http://www.internet.org.za/ect_act.html#Hosting. This notice is issued when someone alleges that some unlawful activity has taken place on a web site that we host. In this instance, the notice is in respect of allegedly offending content located at [insert URL here] which our records indicate you own.

“We are now required to inter alia (i) respond expeditiously to the notice and (ii) inform ISPA what steps we have taken in response to this notice.

“We have the following 4 options available to us:

“1. Remove the content which is the subject of the take-down notice

“2. Refuse the take-down request

“3. Pass this take-down notification on to our customer

“4. Take any other steps we deem to be appropriate….

“Since removing any content could have a significant impact on you, and in order for us to make an informed decision, we are drawing your attention to the take-down notice and request you to either (i) remove the offensive content or (ii) furnish us with detailed and cogent reasons as to why you refuse to do so. Should you refuse to do so, we nevertheless reserve the right to remove it unilaterally. We are entitled to do this in terms of our Terms of Service which you have agreed to.

“We accordingly specifically draw your attention to our Terms of Service (Specific Terms & Conditions; Clause 3.5 & 3.6 [1]). These clauses relate specifically to Hetzner’s right to suspend / terminate websites that communicate offensive / unlawful content. See http://www.hetzner.co.za/index.php/hosting/pages/specific-terms-and-conditions/.

“Please would you furnish us with a response by 16 November 2010 in order for us make a timeous decision.”

I responded by refusing to remove the ‘offending’ material because it is my reader’s right to say what they want (within reason, of course – and only the courts can really decide what that reason should be). As a publisher, I can choose to let comments ride, and as a reader, you can choose to take offence – but if you don’t like what’s there, you do have recourse to the courts.

I felt that if von Ulmenstein can say nasty stuff about others, why shouldn’t others be able to say what they wanted about her?

The result was scary, and it’s very, very relevant to our political situation at the moment. Which, of course, is relevant to the future of tourism in South Africa (in the main article in today’s mailer, you’ll read about the Right2Know campaign – and why you should be supporting it).

Seems to me, though, that my (soon to be ex-)web host has a lot more power than any politician could even begin to want.

Imagine what would happen if the dangerous little leader of the baby ANC learned that all he has to do is cry “Teacher, they’re being nasty to me!”