Slashdot Mirror


Whois Record Falsification Closer To Illegality

PipianJ writes "Reuters is reporting that the House of Representatives has recently passed the bill that would approve of penalties for those using fraudulent WHOIS records (H.R. 3632). Interestingly however, this does not directly outlaw it, instead extending the penalty by seven years for felonies performed using such fraudulent websites. The Senate has not yet passed their version (S.2242). The bill as originally written, however, focuses primarily on penalties for promoting counterfeit music, computer programs, and other media with identical labeling."

4 of 289 comments (clear)

  1. Re:more gmail 4 u by xstonedogx · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Check out the URL carefully. Unless you like penisbird, no clicky.

    If you truly want a gmail invite and haven't gotten one yet, mail me. I've got a few.

  2. Re:Several more years on top of existing penalties by bigt_littleodd · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    This is *so* OT of the original story, but since you brought up voting for Badnarik...

    You can vote for whatever candidate strikes your fancy. AAMOF, I am very happy that you are voting at all, which is more than most people in the US do.

    But think about the real outcome of voting for a non-Kerry candidate. If you agree with me that Bush must be ousted from office, voting for any other candidate besides Kerry serves no purpose other than to dilute the non-Bush voter support, thus Bush is even more likely to win the election. In my opinion, Ralph Nader's presence on the ballots pulled just enough support away from Al Gore to keep Gore from winning the 2000 election. Thus, Bush took the prize.

    --
    Let's play Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. I'll be Pestilence.
  3. Re:Several more years on top of existing penalties by babybird · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    That's true for swing states, but if you don't happen to live in one of those, you may as well vote for the person you think will be the best candidate regardless of party affiliation. Otherwise the two parties get the message from the voting public that the two parties are all they really want and have no incentive to adapt to reality.

    --
    Keith D.
  4. Re:Several more years on top of existing penalties by ratamacue · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The reason for "federalizing" laws which already exist is simply to expand the powers and general scope of the federal government. Look at the incredible (exponential?) growth of the US federal government over the past century. History shows that the powerful elite are uninterested in repealing laws or reducing the scope of government. They are here to add new laws and secure more revenue, and further entangle themselves in the market (aka the cookie jar). There's a reason why governments expand over their lifetimes -- because it benefits those in power.