Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

House Bill Won't Criminalize Free Wi-Fi Operators

Posted by kdawson on from the what-were-they-thinking dept.

Velcroman98 sends word of a bill that passed the US House of Representatives by a lopsided vote of 409 to 2. It would require everyone who runs an open Wi-Fi connection to report illegal images, including "obscene" cartoons and drawings, or be fined up to $300,000. The Securing Adolescents From Exploitation-Online (SAFE) Act was rushed through the House without any hearings or committee votes, and the version that passed on a voice vote reportedly differs substantially from the last publicly available version. CNET reports that sentiment in favor of such a bill is strong in the Senate as well. Update: 12/07 06:22 GMT by Z : As clarified in an Ars writeup, this summary is a bit off-base. The bill doesn't require WiFi owners to police anything, merely 'stiffening the penalties' for those who make no effort to report obvious child pornography.

4 of 540 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Stupid, moronic, fearmongering, etc. by c0ck_l0rge · · Score: 0, Troll

    Sadly, we know it's fcuked up too. If I could get Canadian citizenship, I would in a heartbeat. Know any ladies looking for an ex-patriot husband? I don't like being a citizen of the current "USA".

    --
    nothin' sounds quite like an 808
  2. Re:Sad, but predictable by spun · · Score: 0, Troll

    Rugged individualist libertarian types hate being told what to do, even if it's the right thing. If you told them they are required to breath oxygen, they'd pass out in minutes.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  3. you misrepresented my point by circletimessquare · · Score: 0, Troll

    i'm not talking about what we SHOULD do, i'm making an observation about people's irrational expectations

    i'm not saying you have to secure wifi

    you misrepresented what i said as saying we HAVE to compel people to secure their wifi

    we don't have to make any laws, no one has to secure their wifi

    i'm just saying that if you kvetch about people with unsecure wifi, stop kvetching about this retarded law. or, if you kvetch about this retarded law, stop kvetching about people with unsecure wifi. because it is not logically consistent to be able to do both at the same time, under current technology, and with an understanding of essential human laziness

    i'm saying that noobs will not make the extra effort to secure their wireless unless the laws are insane and severe

    and i'm not saying this is a good thing, i'm just making a sad observation about reality

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  4. Dear (Not Gay) Republican by Lost+Penguin · · Score: 0, Troll

    Here is an image you will be interested in ....
    Goatse

    --
    I am the unwilling control for my Origin.