Slashdot Mirror
NJ Bill Would Prohibit Anonymous Posts on Forums
An anonymous reader writes "The New Jersey legislature is considering a bill that would require operators of public forums to collect users' legal names and addresses, and effectively disallow anonymous speech on online forums. This raises some serious issues, such as to what extent local and state governments can go in enacting and enforcing Internet legislation."
Might want to remind the New Jersey legislature that "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
At least with the First Amendment, they can get out of it by saying "It says "CONGRESS" shall make no law, not New Jersey."
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
I RTF Bill and it'll get slapped down by the courts.
The bill does not define "reasonable" and it does not require a court to find that information posted is "false or defamatory".
And "false" information is not necessarily defamatory. Maybe if the bill said "False and defamatory" it'd stand a chance, because truth is an affirmative defense against charges of libel/slander.
I can scream defamation/libel at the top of my lungs and it doesn't matter for shit until a Judge says "yea, that was libel."
This Bill is poorly written from a legal standpoint, not just in it's comprehension of the internet.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
This is the problem with any structure of checks and balances -- there is no penalty for violating the oath to uphold a given constitution.
How about an amendment to all the Constitutions with a 3 strikes and you're out law? If a law-maker votes for 3 bills that are later found to be unconstitutional, they're booted.
It amazes me how much junk makes it past the various Supreme Courts, though. Sure, this law might get tossed, but how many more make it to the books?
Some users commit libel/slander, harass, break copyright law, etc. and law enforcement needs a way to be able to get these users.
The same can be said of anonymous pamphlets. The same has been done with anonymous pamphlets.
And yet, anonymous pamphlets have been very specifically ruled to be constititonally protected by the Supreme Court.
The cops' "need" to find people does not supersede the people's right to free expression, even anonymously.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Sounds like a direct attack on Wikipedia.
new jersey bill is a direct violation of section 230 ( keeps webhosts and bloggers immune from this )
u sc_sec_47_00000230----000-.html
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode47/
mainly
No cause of action may be brought and no liability may be imposed under any State or local law that is inconsistent with this section.
Mod parent up. It's also a violation, IMHO, of the First, Fourth (right to privacy) and 14th Ammendmants to the Constitution, and the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3). Furthermore, how would New Jersey inforce this? Would it apply only to sites hosted in Jersey? Companies and/or individuals based in New Jersey? If this passes (which it won't) then there will be a huge public outcry. Maybe their intention is to help define the legal jurisdiction of the Internet, setting up more control for the Feds. That's not good.
By today's definitions, the founding fathers of the USA would have been terrorists, or at the least, insurgents. This legislation is designed to suppress anonyous writing, which may cause people to Think Too Much, which is going to be outlawed soon.
But, if you think about it, these folks are trying to help protect us. The terrorists hate us because of our freedoms. So, take away the freedoms, you take away the reason for the terrorists to hate us. You take away their reason to be terrorists.
All this is part of the brilliant War On Terror.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.