Increasingly, in the UK, the charge of "Malicious Communications" has been brought to bear upon members of the public who use social media or other electronic communication to post messages which have caused offence.

Most recently we have Tom Daly, the British Olympic diver who missed out on a medal yesterday.

Tom Daley Twitter abuse: Police arrest boy in Weymouth

A teenager has been arrested by police investigating abuse of Team GB diver Tom Daley on Twitter.

After coming fourth in the men's synchronised 10m platform diving event on Monday, the 18-year-old received a message telling him he had let down his father.

Daley's father Rob died in 2011 from brain cancer.

A 17-year-old boy was arrested at a guest house in the Weymouth area on suspicion of malicious communications.

~

Various other recent arrests:
________________________

Arrest over 'racist tweet' at footballer Danny Simpson

A man has been arrested after a Premier League footballer was allegedly subjected to racist abuse on Twitter.

Newcastle United defender Danny Simpson claims he was targeted on the social networking site on Monday.

Northumbria Police arrested and bailed an 18-year-old man on suspicion of malicious communications.
________________________

Councillor Ken Gregory cautioned for 'get Aids' voicemail

A Tory councillor who left a message saying "with a bit of luck you'll get Aids" on another councillor's phone has been cautioned by police.

Ken Gregory, a member of Thanet council in Kent, received a caution for malicious communications on Wednesday.

John Worrow, who is bisexual and an Independent on Thanet District Council, received the voicemail message on his mobile phone earlier in May.

Mr Gregory has been suspended from the Thanet council Conservative group.
________________________

Man sentenced over racist tweets about Newcastle United

A football fan who posted racist comments on Twitter directed at Newcastle United has been given a suspended jail sentence.

Sunderland fan Peter Copeland, 29, had admitted two offences under the Malicious Communications Act.
________________________

Jade Goody website 'troll' from Manchester jailed

An "internet troll" who posted obscene messages on Facebook sites set up in memory of dead people has been jailed.

Colm Coss, of Ardwick, Manchester, posted on a memorial page for Big Brother star Jade Goody and a tribute site to John Paul Massey, a Liverpool boy mauled to death by a dog.

The 36-year-old "preyed on bereaved families" for his "own pleasure", Manchester Magistrates Court heard.

He was jailed for 18 weeks for sending "malicious communications".
________________________

.... and the list goes on ...

~

The draft of the Malicious Communications Act states:

1 Offence of sending letters etc. with intent to cause distress or anxiety. Any person who sends to another person— .
(a)a [letter, electronic communication or article of any description] which conveys— .
(i)a message which is indecent or grossly offensive; .
(ii)a threat; or .
(iii)information which is false and known or believed to be false by the sender; or .
(b)any [F2article or electronic communication] which is, in whole or part, of an indecent or grossly offensive nature, .
is guilty of an offence if his purpose, or one of his purposes, in sending it is that it should, so far as falling within paragraph (a) or (b) above, cause distress or anxiety to the recipient or to any other person to whom he intends that it or its contents or nature should be communicated.

(2)A person is not guilty of an offence by virtue of subsection (1)(a)(ii) above if he shows— .
(a)that the threat was used to reinforce a demand [F3made by him on reasonable grounds]; and .
(b)that he believed [F4, and had reasonable grounds for believing,] that the use of the threat was a proper means of reinforcing the demand.

~

Is this law fair?
Does it infringe on the right to free speech?

I'm a firm believer that one has the right to say, pretty much, whatever one wants to another, and that it should remain legal to do so, whether the remark is insulting, offensive, sexist, homophobic or racist.

However, this line is blurred when transferred from oral communication from one to another, let's say one person passing another on the street, to being a recording accessible to the public, say a twitter or facebook post.

This blurring of the line conflicts with my belief. I'm unsure whether the offenders referred to in the cases above should face legal consequences or not.

Does the fact that the offensive remark is subsequently accessible by thousands, millions, and is therefore a matter of public record, somehow worsen the remark?

Is there similar legislation in other countries?

Thoughts?