Create an e-annoyance, go to jail

[BruteForce]

Filed under "Your Tax Dollars At Work"

Its now illegal to annoy someone using the internet... I think MENACE was specifically mentioned in the legislation. :P

"It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity."

http://news.com.com/Create+an+e-annoyance,+go+to+jail/2010-1028_3-6022491.html

[hitchhiker]

Filed under "Your Tax Dollars At Work"

Its now illegal to annoy someone using the internet... I think MENACE was specifically mentioned in the legislation. :P

"It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity."

http://news.com.com/Create+an+e-annoyance,+go+to+jail/2010-1028_3-6022491.html

IMHO Unconstitutional, even with a corporate-stacked supreme court.

:D

[BruteForce]

Not to mention unenforceable...

[dwasson]

I'm doomed!

[gdmjoe]

Hummm ... Does it also apply to forum threads :confused:
:D

[MarauderMark]

Jeez whats next?:shake:

[SergntMac]

Hummm ... Does it also apply to forum threads It could come to that, which (I believe) is why Logan runs a tight ship here. I for one, am glad he does.

Right now, it's statutory law, and once prosecutors begin preparing cases, case law will further define application. As an example, this bill was shaped around the word "annoy", which appears to lack any real meaning on it's own. What annoys one party may entertain another. We shall see "annoy" morph into other terms we can better define, such as "harass", "incite", "hateful", "intimidating", and so on. Give it time, I'd say within a year, we'll see more applications to life on-line.

This bill also grew from a need to protect women from Domestic Violence, and you may ask "how?" "What's the connection?" Well...Remember way back when you read your first "for a good time, call Jane at 888.8888" on a john wall? Well, today it's azzholes selling nude pics of ex-girlfriends to porn sites. That would certainly "annoy" me if one of them was my sister, or, daughter.

Until now, prosecutors had few tools to work with, and it's been a booming business too. A sicko who's into power and control can emotionally abuse his spouse/family member and force them into deviant conduct out of fear of exposure and public ridicule. Sorry to say, guys, but it's happening more than you think.

Can this bill be expanded to cover other topics? Indeed, just page back to the 1920s First there was wire, then wire taps, followed by wire fraud and today, automatic dialers, automated telephone sales calls, and telephone harassment. At every turn of technology, a new use for a telephone, wireless or not, brewed a law to manage it. Some laws helped the technology prosper, others prevent abuse, either way here's your paradigm.

IMHO, it's a good thing, but I admit we brought it upon ourselves. If there was no obscenity, there would be no censorship. If there was no domestic abuse, we would not have Domestic Violence laws. All this bill calls for right now, is to unmask the attacker, and that's fair. Say what you want on the Internet, but sign your real name to it.

None of us can really hide, IP addresses are as certain as your home address, when the investigation is serious enough. This bill opens web site records, and good folks like Logan will have to comply, or, suffer shut down.

We enjoy free speech in this country, yes. But, no one is allowed to run through a crowded theater and yell "FIRE!" when there isn't any. You have a door bell on or near your front door to announce visitors, but to constantly ring that and run away is "annoying" behavior. Illinois criminal code on telephone harassment uses the word "obnoxious", again, a judgemental word, but would suffer a ringing telephone from midnight to dawn and not find that obnoxious? Illinois' hate crime statutes include internet use, and carry the phrase "expose to public ridicule", but the attacker and the victim must both reside in Illinois for it to be effective, because hate mail (paper or e-mail) isn't hate mail until it's read and wherever the reader is standing, is where the crime occurs. That's an obstacle for prosecution...Whoops...Maybe not anymore.

Can you see what's coming? I can. If not, best for you to step away from the tracks, that train is going to hurt.

[MM03MOK]

Remember the saying, "You Are What You Eat"? With a little twist to this phrase, do we also want "You Are What You Type" to hold true?

Posts can raise concerns if undertaken with the intent to injure others. Thus, it is essential that every person ensure that his or her actions and words cannot be misunderstood.

I'm sharing with you the following communications guidelines, which I review regularly in my business world.

Assume everything you write or say will become public and be discoverable in litigation. Even verbal statements are discoverable via deposition and other discovery tactics. Think before you write or say it and do not do so if not necessary.
Avoid language that could be misconstrued. Statements taken out of context can leave misimpressions. Instead, try to express points accurately, precisely and succinctly.
Stick to the facts. Avoid conjecture, personal opinions, characterizations, exaggeration and inflammatory language. They are unnecessary and lead to misunderstanding of one’s intentions.
Cut the comedy. Inside jokes and sarcasm are dangerous since, by their nature, they refer to unstated facts or mean the opposite of what is said.
Don’t exaggerate or overstate your intentions. Statements can easily be misconstrued.
Use e-mail and voice mail judiciously. E-mail and voice mail are records every bit as much as traditional documents printed on paper and should not be treated as casual, "off the record" communications. Not all e-mails require a response. Do not fall for the "myth of the delete key" and assume that either is gone once you have deleted it. Remember, once you send an e-mail or voice mail you have no control over what the recipients do with it.
Beware the Blackberry. Mobile e-mail encourages informal, abbreviated messages. Such devices also don’t have spell-check. Read your messages before you send them to make sure that your meaning is appropriate and cannot be misunderstood.This is something more of us should be doing. We can now spellcheck our posts, but more importantly, we should "proof" our posts for context before we "Submit Reply."
REMEMBER: Expressing a good motive poorly can be as damaging as expressing a bad motive.

[MENINBLK]

Please hold what Mary writes as a truth.

A few years ago, I used to be an Assistant Moderator for an MSN Forum.
I used to give valuable information to anyone who needed help
configuring their audio hardware in their computer.

Occasionally, I would get the "How does your A compare to brand Z's B ?".
I would try to answer these questions in language that your 2 year old would understand,
without getting anything near technical, and with only whatever necessary jargon
that would not confuse the question any further.

WELL.....
One day Brand X brought suit to my employer.
They claimed Patent Infringement and Product Defamation.
I was a very BRIGHT focal point of the lawsuit.
I was asked to travel out to California because Brand X wanted to depose me
and any information and/or materials I possesed that would help them to win their case.
Our lawyer was very knowledgeable of our products,
and was very knowledgeable of the role I played with my employer.
I had to show him how I interacted with MSN, and the Forum Manager,
and explain to him in both lay and technical terms, what I was doing on the internet.

Then he asked me, "Do you know what you are being accused of ?".
I looked at him and said, "I can only imagine."

"The competition states that you are writing and posting documentation on the internet
that does not correctly indicate the proper usage and description of their products.
You are writing defamating comments in a public area of the internet.
Are you aware that you are doing this ?"

I was aware of what I was doing, and it was not anything near the extent of what they called it.
What I was writing was what I knew to be the truth.
I had enough knowledge of what I was talking about,
and had enough experience with BOTH PRODUCTS to compare them
in an open public forum without defaming anyone.

After which, I was presented with a small forest of MSN Forum printouts,
of which were authored by me.

"Did you write these posts ?"
"Yes"
"Now explain to me everything you know, so that I can understand
your background and knowledge of these products and technologies.
I can determine which of you are right, and which of you are wrong."

Needless to say, I am still working for the same employer,
and Brand X exhausted their funds investing into a fruitless lawsuit.

After the lawsuit was over, my Employer bought Brand X.

You can never be too sure of what you do, and how someone else
will try an take your words and use them against you.
Don't give anyone that chance...
You have more to lose than they do.

[seans]

My department has had several successful prosecutions of arrests we made for harassment or threats made via the internet.