Slashdot Mirror
State Lawmaker Wants To Ban Anonymous Posting Online
bfwebster writes "According to a local news article from last week, Kentucky state lawmaker Tim Couch wants to ban anonymous posting on the internet in order to 'cut down on online bullying', which he says has been 'a particular problem in eastern Kentucky.' His bill would require posters to register with their real names and e-mail addresses under threat of fines. Looks like another battle in the right for anonymous free speech."
hope in hell of being enforced, or are at the very least enforceable.
=======
Science -- Sealed, Delivered.
We should ban stupid politicians. Unfortunately, how do you ban ignorance?
...they could just install a keystroke logger on both the computers in Eastern Kentucky.
now you may not be an anonymous coward for much longer
If people can get past, can they get future? Best way to confuse a stoner
Like the Mickey Mouse Act, this bill has the informal title of "Tim Couch's 14 Year Old Daughter Just Clicked on a Goatse Link Bill."
My work here is dung.
Because every message board on the internet is legally subject to whatever state laws this guy can push through... I know /b/ is!
I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
Send your anonymous comments to Rep. Tim Couch using his official form at http://www.lrc.ky.gov/Mailform/H090.htm
If you're getting bullied online by anonymous people and taking it seriously, then your parents messed up big time somewhere along the way. I grew up with the internet, and was constantly harassed by anonymous idiots. I just knew better than to take them seriously, since they are SOME IDIOT ON THE INTERNET!!!!!1!!1!!!!lim(x->0)[sin(x)/x]. I'm getting really sick and tired of parents trying to use the legal system to protect their kids. The idea is that the legal system protects kids from things they don't understand. I'm pretty sure that the average child understands that some anonymous person on the internet cannot harm them and that they are probably just some other stupid kid. I wish parents would start actually raising their kids. My parents did a great job, and it was their first time.
Just figure out who I am so you can find me.
Just wait `til I get my hands on him. I'll teach him not to mess with anonymous people on teh internets.
Slashdot = -1 Redundant, Asperger, kdawson FUD, Libertarian, and Linux
there's really no purpose in discussing this - its simply fodder for humor.
with that said, methinks said politician would be quite chagrined to have his doings on TEH INTERWEBS completely revealed to the world.
any takers?
And if you think any country's laws - including the USA's - can regulate the world-wide Internet, you're dreaming. All this law would accomplish is to cause the creation of anonymous blogging centers in countries with stricter privacy laws.
And by the way, hasn't the Supreme Court already said that you have a right to be anonymous online?
The only people who would benefit from this are the individuals, corporations, and politicians seeking to quash dissent by outing, and then suing, those who post unflattering comments, no matter how truthful. And those aren't the people I want to be helping out.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
... am I breaking the law yet?
Tim Couch? You mean like the crappy NFL quarterback? It's not the same guy (I HAD to check), but seriously, he's offering this bill so people will stop crapping on his name. I mean really. If his name was Michael Jordan, he wouldn't submit this legislation.
Pax Vobiscum
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't SCOTUS already rule that anonymous speech is protected?
Ah yes, here we go: http://www.eff.org/issues/anonymity
Yet another law just waiting to be struck down, and it took five seconds on Google to demonstrate why.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
he couldn't play football for a damn either ...
Let's all post as AC to this subject!
Bills like this don't get anywhere in America. Unless he can come up with some religious reason to deny anonymous postings, there won't be any support from his constituency. You start messing with the first or second amendment in Kentucky and it's going to be an uphill battle.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Hey why doesn't Tim Couch just shut up and give me his lunch money already? Sheesh.
How in the world can I claim "First Post" otherwise?
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
Hey Tim Couch,
Why not try to pass other non-enforcable laws too. Try these ones on:
"Tim Couch bans gravity in the state of Kentucky."
"Tim Couch raises speed limit for light."
"Tim Couch bans beer in all counties."
"Tim Couch raises smoking age from 18 to 64."
Why don't you actually pass a useful law that helps to reduce racisim, which is rampant in your state and is the core issue around much of the 'bullying' problem?
like in real life where most bullies know their names of their victims. No one is bullied in real life as we all know! No one is being bullied even though teachers and parents are fully aware of it!
So let's find some thing (internet) to yell about because you don't like it (because you cannot control it)
Uh yeah real "name" and real "email" address. Apparently doesn't know anything about Mailinator or BugMeNot...
Because nobody would ever think of giving false information when they register, right?
- "Tim"
We absolutely need govt. regulation for websites. Greedy private companies, looking out only for their own profit will do nothing to stop problems such as online bullying, adult content targeted toward children, spam, etc.
It is a loony libertarian idea to say that private individuals and companies, left to themselves will sort it out.
Ooh, flamebait, fun! It's Monday after the clock change, so I'll entertain myself while my brain awakes.
:-P
First of all, you spelled "know" incorrectly.
Secondly, where did anyone mention religion? I must've missed that.
Thirdly, do you have to use profanity? I mean I just sent Rep. ClueStick an email on his form, and was perfectly polite in telling him where to stick his bill
std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
See.
So instead of trying to analyze the problem of cyber-bullying and trying to find a real solution, this guy wants to prevent a completely normal, and often useful, activity.
How did this guy become a lawmaker? Law is all about balancing rights of many segments of society (sometimes conflicting). You can't just pass a law to help a certain segment while instantly treading on the rights of everyone else. Or perhaps he thinks being anonymous online is "no big deal" unless you're a bully or something.
Shouldn't you be doing something useful?
I think it's a great idea, the US can fuck up the internet on their side as much as possible, then all us Europeans can make more money from the increase in US users to our websites.
And people wonder why every time we hear someone with a southern twang, we automatically assume he's dumb as a post?
All right, I'll grant rural PA honorary southerner status for this one.
I'll post this one anonymously just for grins.
Next, they will attempt to ban attempts to disguise your identity in public by wearing masks.
Posting disparaging comments online is analogous to meeting in a library and making disparaging comments. The latter is protected by the Bill of Rights under the Freedom of Assembly. The former should be protected by the same bill.
And besides... anonymous posts online can technically be traced back to an IP address and that can be traced to a specific computer with a specific location and knowing the time can aid you to determine a specific person. Thus, the notion that anonymous cowards are truly anonymous is flawed. So if somebody posts something truly, then the coward can be traced and identified so criminal charges can be pressed.
Support the 30 Hour Work Week!!!
Let us know how that turns out. For every control you try to put in place a hundred different holes will be found.
and then watch the bill burn in a flame of un-enforceability. We can join with our 4chan brethren, sing cumbaya around the fire, and make marshmallows. :)
Pedobear not allowed. I don't want the FBI Party van showing up. Those damn bastards have no sense of fun...... I tried to spark a joint and the bastards tried to arrest me!
Just in case this gets passed, I am going to take advantage of the anonymous coward option a bit more now on Slashdot. I want to feel that I got my fair use's worth. This doesn't mean I am going to post anything insightful or funny, but I have to get my money's worth, though I am not how you get your money's worth of something that is free - oh, well.
/. needs to mourn this by making every comment on that day an anonymous one :)
If this ever gets passed
"Your stupid arrogant little piddly-ass dumb-fuck laws in KENTUCKY have no bearing on me in Canada."
Then why are you so upset about it?
Anyone want to explain to me how I, a resident of Massachusetts, am subject to the laws of Kentucky? Forget whether anonymity is generally protected by the 1st Amendment (which I believe it is according to the SCOTUS and common sense), simple lack of jurisdiction makes this fail.
Even if the law was framed as a requirement by Kentucky website "operators", if the operator is also anonymous, how do you prove he's a Kentucky resident (and thus subject to this law)?
Is this some how manages to pass, good luck getting everyone to follow it. No one will. This is just another stupid senator, trying to do stupid things to try and get more votes.
We need to ban anonymous posting to the internet because bullies who post anonymously are hard to track down.
So we'll make them register their names and email addresses with the state.
But they can get literally thousands of email address, for free, from services that aren't subject to our state's (or even country's) laws, and there is no mechanism even possible to police what email address or name they actually use, so they can continue to post anonymously.
And even though we can't track down anonymouse cyber bullies now, we'll be able to later, when they're not using the name or email address they registered with the state.
In addition to having no effect whatsoever, we will give them a legal defense of "Well, that's not my name or email adress! I registered those with the state, just like the law requires, so how could it be me?"
This doesn't even look like an attempt to "do something." In fact, it looks more like an attempt to protect bullies than punish them.
Probably something like this: Hai, guise, I've just registered here! >Newfag >Newfag >Newfag is new >Lurk moar
That's as ridiculous as banning an article of clothing that can be used to disguise identity! It could never happen! THE VERY THOUGHT IS PREPOSTEROUS!!
Then again, as far as the hoodie ban goes, anything that even makes an attempt at reclaiming the UK's streets is welcome, whatever the free-speech implications.
Bullying on the internet, however, can be addressed more effectively by simply rotating 180 degrees until one's face is no longer pointing toward the screen. Further measures may include going out, getting some fresh air, and finding a nice hobby.
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
A law that isn't enforceable is totally pointless. If it is a legit, enforceable law, then you can debate if it is a good one or not, but an unenforceable law is just the height of stupidity and a waste of time. I mean we could pass a law saying the sun needs to be cooler, but there is fuck all we can do to make that happen, so it would be a waste of time.
I'm not saying I agree with laws that are restricting speech, but at least if it was a law that was enforceable then there could be a point to it. You could debate if it was a good idea or not, if the tradeoff was worth it. Here, it is just a fucking waste of time since regardless of any merits, it just won't work.
Could this have any correlation to the protests against scientology? Perhaps in response to the protest on the 15th?
Those who live by the sword, get shot by those who live by the gun...
I don't see how that would help - how many people in Kentucky are named 'Bubba'?
-- "Mathematics is music for the mind, and Music is Mathematics for the Soul. - J.S. Bach"
which I don't see happening anytime soon, but there you go.
As far as the actual topic goes, I believe anonymous posting should be allowed, just like anonymous tips to the police regarding any illegal activity. Unfortunately, most people are not using anonymity for good reasons, but because they want to get away with whatever they're doing - be it the 'bullying' mentioned here, or libel/slander, etc; things that themselves are likely to have a negative impact on another, with no particular virtue other than the entertainment of the poster, and sometimes even illegal in and of themselves.
Waiting for them to pass law requiring everyone to stick their head up their anus.
Ignoring Diebold for a moment, isn't your fine land one of these Democracy places where you choose the politicians? If you have an idiot, then that's coz you chose him!
Engineering is the art of compromise.
This bill is something the senator introduced at the request of his constituents, and would apply only to Kentucky residents. The way he was quoted in the original story makes it clear that he thinks it's hairbrained, unlikely to pass, sure to be shot down if it is, and he won't vote for it. Don't go beating up on the guy for trying to appease his constituency- for all I know, one of them is my grandmother-in-law, and I've certainly said any number of things to get her to stop pestering me.
(I love you Sandra, but you're not the most computer savvy individual)
Uh, "if it looks roughly mouse-shaped according to my infra-red sensitive pit, eat it"? --Chris Burke 09-08-10
The reaction chamber of a nuclear power plant?
Hello, Lawmakers of Kentucky. We are Anonymous.
Over the years, we have been watching you. Your campaigns of misinformation; suppression of dissent; your litigious nature, all of these things have caught our eye. With the leakage of your latest propaganda video into mainstream circulation, the extent of your malign influence over those who trust you, who call you leader, has been made clear to us. Anonymous has therefore decided that your organization should be destroyed. For the good of your followers, for the good of mankind -- for the laughs -- we shall expel you from the Internet and systematically dismantle the State of Kentucky in its present form. We acknowledge you as a serious opponent, and we are prepared for a long, long campaign. You will not prevail forever against the angry masses of the body politic. Your methods, hypocrisy, and the artlessness of your organization have sounded its death knell.
You cannot hide; we are everywhere.
We cannot die; we are forever. We're getting bigger every day--and solely by the force of our ideas, malicious and hostile as they often are. If you want another name for your opponent, then call us Legion, for we are many.
Yet for all that we are not as monstrous as you are; still our methods are a parallel to your own. Doubtless you will use the Anon's actions as an example of the persecution you have so long warned your followers would come; this is acceptable. In fact, it is encouraged. We are your SPs.
Gradually as we merge our pulse with that of your "State", the suppression of your followers will become increasingly difficult to maintain. Believers will wake, and see that salvation has no price. They will know that the stress, the frustration that they feel is not something that may be blamed upon Anonymous. No -- they will see that it stems from a source far closer to each. Yes, we are SPs. But the sum of suppression we could ever muster is eclipsed by that of the RTC.
Knowledge is free.
We are Anonymous.
We are Legion.
We do not forgive.
We do not forget.
Expect us.
and I want a law passed that forces all governments to give me 10% cut of their rack... taxes. We both have the same chance getting our wishes granted.
You can't handle the truth.
... stopping online bullying by banning anonymity?
Just buy a fucking dog; it's easier.
I almost expected this entire topic to be filled with nothing but AC posts.
Perhaps you mean a different thing than I do when you say "science."
I for one welcome our uni-toothed, hillbilly overlords. Let the dewling banjoes bigin!
load "$",8,1
As seen from this report: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNO6G4ApJQY
Je ne parle pas francais.
How does the proposed law deal with international websites? Just like RIM (the makers of the Blackberry) keep their servers in Canada for patent-related reasons, it seems like offshore web hosting would suddenly grow very popular.
But, then again, an increase in price of services might change the marketplace.
This is bad for whistle blowers who some times don't want to say there name and this is also bad for things like crime stoppers where some times saying your name can get you killed.
You forgot the "Think of the Children" crowd. Making anonymous postings illegal will make it "easier" to catch the predators after your children!
I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
Since when has Kentucky had internet access?
that this isn't a national law. as for the people in kentucy, i suggest to either skip state or usurp the law
If people can get past, can they get future? Best way to confuse a stoner
I gotta say I'm not very surprised.
Maybe he's afraid that one of his asshat politicians will do the same after getting the idea from our asshat politicians?
I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
With the recent (last decade) crackdown on childhood bullies, there is a serious shortage. Luckily the internet is picking up some of the slack.
Bullies were one of the last bastions of modern childhood which actually taught kids how the real world works. Now, you get out of highschool and you're completely unprepared for the fact that there are tons of cut-throat assholes out there willing to take your lunch money. God help them when their parents pass.
Yes. I'm serious.
Bloody Git.
Can someone please help us define "bullying"?
If you cant, then there sets the stage for the next Freedom of Speech Act.
What develops when you restrict freedoms using ambiguous wording such as bullying, is a serious violation of your freedom to express.
The only thing that will happen is that they will thoughtfully persecute and then prosecute anyone who posts messages that do not fit into the governing body's ideologies.
"Tim Couch bans beer in all counties."
Too late. Almost half of Kentucky's counties (54 out of 120) are already dry. Well, except for the bootleggers and moonshiners.
Three Squirrels
Here is my new online ID: Tim Couch
Just wait to see what I say next.....
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Your silly laws will never catch me! I fart in your general direction!
is people from NOT READING THE ARTICLE! This would be the end of Slashdot, I am afraid.
Donde Ser Geek No Duele
You send all the account executives, telephone sanitizers, etc. to Golgafrincham.
My blog
Don't offshore. Nearshore to Canada.
/. servers to Nunavut (easy cooling), he could still be in trouble as the operator if he logged in while in Kentucky.
It's the operator, not the location that's the key to enforcement. So, if Taco moved all the
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
Lawmakers can be so ignorant. Most of them really think you can solve technical problems with laws. The thing is that laws can forbid things, but laws can't make things impossible.
;)
Things still get stolen, people still get murdered or waterboarded.
And because I can, I'll post this as AC
...marrying your 13 year-old first cousin will still be OK!
The smartest man in the whole, wide world really don't know that much. - Mose Allison
I just heard Tim Couch is a cannibal. Yes, folks, it's true - Tim Couch eats babies!
He's a major douchebag and I hear he was caught taking it up the ass from a crossdresser. How the fuck could someone like him and his CD boyfriend pick that kind of life?
Also, I hear that when he was in little league, he was taking steroids and had his blood doped. Granted, it did not help him much, however he's still a slimeball of a cheat.
Posting anonymously because I can. . .
That'll be amusing when he tries to get this passed. I'd love to see this bill get laughed at when he is informed that it has virtually no enforceable methods and that international users will just see this as another ignorant "Stupid American" method of trying to control what it cannot.
Oh, before anyone mods me as flamebait (which the zealots love to do) I'm a patriotic American and in case you haven't heard about something called The Monroe Doctrine...
You sucked when you played for Cleveland, you sucked when you played for Green Bay, you sucked when you played for Jacksonville, and you suck now, when nobody wants you on their team. ...And now you want to take away my right to post anonymously? Well FUCK Tim Couch. Fuck him up his stupid ass.
Besides the stupidity of the law...
:)
If I post anon how *preciscely* do you expect to levy fines if i'm anon to begin with? So it's only the people posting information (and thus in step with the law) that this could apply to and then they obviously wouldn't be guilty of violating it.
yes yes, you can add more laws requiring servers to track IP and other info but that's not what this law says
let's make a law that says it's illegal to go over 100MPH in a car that's not capable of doing so while we're at it.
You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
..she omits one important case. We as a country have discovered that it is possible to rule innocent men, if they are sufficiently indebted.
increase offline bullying by making it illegal to anonymously blow the whistle on it. If you don't want to be bullied online, don't make your identity known online. If the bully doesn't know who you are, how will he target you? Oh, but he wants it illegal to hide your online identity. Wouldn't this increase bullying?
"Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society."
SCOTUS in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission
Also, it seems that one "Tim Couch" has been posting a lot of requests for gay porn lately.
I mean, really, did this guy think the law through?
Was that the one on Showtime? I am fairly sure I saw the same thing. The guy doing it was addicted to painkillers? If this is it please tell me the name as I don't remember but this was a great documentary and I want a copy of it. Thanks
All points of time and space are connected.
It is possible to slow down light. The point was impossible laws.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
But there simply is no Constitutional right in the US to anonymous free speech.
I'm sure the argument is that if people are forced to expose their identity they'll be less likely to make unpopular speech. But that has been true since speaking was first invented. I'm not entirely sure how the internet changes that in any meaningful way.
What the internet did was to make anonymous speech easy, which in turn made it popular. But Constitutional rights are not a popularity contest. If there was no right to anonymous free speech in the 1700s, in the 1800s, and in the 1900s, I'm not entirely sure why it should suddenly appear in the 2000s.
And I'm sure someone will point out that the press can keep their sources private and confidential. That's true, but that right lies with the press, not with the speaker.
If this is really what people want, they should start the process to change the Constitution to reflect their changing values instead of trying to attach meaning to the Constitution where none can be found.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
Why is it that Federal law can be created anonymously (voice vote), but there's even the idea that simply posting opinion on a web-based forum anonymously could in anyway become illegal. I guess when you're making the law, hypocracy is not a road-block.
har, what a noob. He should uninstall life.
Hi, I Boris. Hear fix bear, yes?
Doesn't the process of drafting laws require use of public resources (time billed by clerks, cost of materials, etc.)?
Why the hell doesn't someone sue one of these idiots for breach of trust? The fact that it might not get anywhere isn't really the point, I just feel like someone needs to tell these people we won't stand for them wasting time on nonsense like this.
The question is not whether or not the law is enforceable.
The question is whether this bill will help Rep. Couch get reelected in his little corner of Kentucky come November.
(I'd bet $0.11 it does).
2008 is an election year. Expect to see a lot more of this sort of thing, coming soon to a legislature near you.
- until his own postal address and e-mail address are posted online.
So please don't post his address and prove him wrong.
Reduce, reuse, cycle
This is exactly what happens when non-technical politicians think too hard about technology. This is just a silly idea that never really has a chance at becoming reality.
Anonymity is a doubled edged sword. You can use it for good or evil. Instead of a blanket law banning anonymity why not be reasonable about it and ban it when it is necessary. Whistle Blower Blog - Legal, your company did something stupid and now you don't get to get away with it. Instead of going after the person who exposed you maybe you shouldn't have done that in the first place? Critiques - Legal, so someone thinks your product is crap, your advertising is misleading, and your testamonials are made up. They posted anonymously so they didn't have your lawyers breahting down their necks with copyrighted cease and desist letters. Anon Cyber Bullying - Illegal, even when identifying yourself this shouldn't be legal it can and has caused personal harm to someone which means there is not right to free speach here. The jist of it? If the anonymous posting causes bodily harm or is illegal then it shouldn't be allowed. If it is an opinion or the like it doesn't matter if the opinion hurts your bottom line it is still within their rights. How are you going to enforce this anyhow? You can take measures to insure your anonymity remains just that. What are they going to do? Ask nicely that you identify yourself?
According to a local news article from last week, a Kentucky state lawmaker, wants to ban anonymous posting on the internet in order to 'cut down on online bullying', which he says has been 'a particular problem in eastern Kentucky.' However, this lawmaker wishes to remain anonymous because he realizes that people will think he is not very intelligent as the law would be impossible to enforce, and the Supreme Court has already found anonymous posting to be constitutional.
/. should honor the inauspicious occasion by renaming ACs "Tim Couches" for the day.
Part of the hardcore faithful who believed in Apple long before it was cool again to do so
Its obvious the guy is some non-tech redneck that is too much of a pussy to realize that he lives in a country where there is this thing called FREE SPEECH regardless of if its on the internet or not.... he should go cry to his mommy about how some troll posted that he's a whiny ass little bitch on his myspace page and suck it up.... love, Anonymous Mr. Stinky
By analogy, if a kid started a fire playing with matches, this lawmaker would want to ban all sale or possession of matches by anyone.
How about a much more narrowly tailored law? For example, requiring that posters on web sites having a substantial part of their content devoted to information about minors or social networking by minors be required to register with accurate identifying information that can be revealed if a judge determines that bullying has taken place.
FUCK YOU!
too meta?
As an Internet bully I just wanted to say I support this bill. Right now I can only say mean things to you but under this bill I can track you down and give you the wedgie you deserve!
Isn't creating a law to force people to do something just because you think it is right a form of bullying!?
- Dan
Use their own tactics against them: If anonymous posting is illegal, then children will have to post their full names whenever they send a communication on the internet, they're all sure to get molested!
State attempts to regulate the Internet have been tried in many states, for many years, in many guises. Take a look at Utah's Trademark Protection Act. The state government eventually realized that (drumroll) states can't control the Internet. As others here have noted, it's simply not feasible. In the case of the proposed Kentucky legislation, this dooms it before analysis even gets to Constitutional protections on speech, not to mention the Federal government's objections on Dormant Commerce Clause grounds.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
I know it was intended to be funny but network connectivity in Kentucky is actually pretty bad. The MPLS links at our northern Kentucky locations or some of the slowest across our network but also the most expensive. It costs more then Spokane Washington.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/legislator/H090.htm
How does this idiot think his STATE law is going to be enforced outside of his State? This would ensure that no one bought any hosting in the state of Kentucky.
Don't Vote for Norm Dicks! http://www.nodicks2008.com Another nutless dirtbag that voted for the FISA bill!
I asked why a private individual didn't sue this guy (their elected representative) for breach of trust.
I don't see how your post applies at all.
Hey, Tim: Shove it hard up your ass, with the spines still on it, you sister-fucking hillbilly fascist.
First I know enforcing a law like this would be extremely difficult at best. But if you won't use your real name then it is a real good indication what you are saying shouldn't be said. Sure maybe 1% or less antonymous posts are for a legit reason a whistle blower issue, but the rest are blatant lies and misinformation for the entertainment at someone else's experience. So like so many internet related issue the flakes are screwing things up for this rest.
Nothing to worry about though, not much has a chance of being passed successfuly when Tim Couch is behind it.
..when did we stop teaching kids how to deal (internally as well as externally) with bullying? Why does ANYthing like this have to be a subject for legislation? I'm 43 years old; when I was in 7th grade I was being bullied by some kid. We ended up out in the street in front of the school, fist-fighting. I didn't want to resort to that, and I had a fat lip for a few days afterwards, but that kid and I got along more or less OK after that. The school even understood why it had to happen that way, so we both got more or less a slap on the wrists over the incident. When did we stop teaching kids to be self-reliant and to stick up for themselves and deal with being bullied? When did "sticks and stones..etc" stop being true? WTF?
Do the police take real world bullying seriously? Or do they just break it up and bring the bullies to their parent to straighten them out [which the parents could care less about]?
There is no way in hell that anybody would give a damn enough to enforce this law should it become enacted. The entire state of Kentucky just wouldn't have the resources.
They don't care about stopping it, they're just trying to make their jobs easier. They just want to be able to place blame more quickly and easily.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
So when someone calls you a giant douche on a forum you'll have their name.
How does that even pretend to stop online bullying?
...in a far less paranoid state of mind than Ms. Rosenbaum's:
"Wise men, though all laws were abolished, would lead the same lives."
--Aristophanes
A friend of my mother worked for directly for the mayor of a moderately sized city in Wisconsin (50k people). After accepting the position, the local police did an in-depth background check on her and attempted to blackmail her with the trivial bits they found to gain leverage over the mayor (as did other local agencies and politically interested parties).
Within 2-3 months, anonymous postings criticizing the mayor appeared all over the local forums and message boards. In response, the mayor sent out all information that he managed to gain access to (emails, IP logs, etc) to any contacts of direct reports that had IT knowledge to attempt to locate the source of the postings (myself included). Although the reason for this was not written down, the friend said it was strongly hinted that the mayor wanted to silence the criticism. My mother's friend resigned shortly afterwards.
Politicians are not as dumb as they appear to be. Some are very smart and have little in the way of morals. They only need a publicly believable reason to ask for something, but do not assume that that politician does not understand the consequences. A lot of times certain phrases are used (think of the children, etc) because politicians know it has a high success rate.
If Americans should be reprimanded about anything in recent times, it should likely be that politicians are not as dumb as they appear. Politicians often feign ignorance because it gives them plausible deniability on the issue, and American society seems to be very forgiving of people who don't know any better.
Whether the politician is smart or dumb, the American public would do well not to give poorly implemented ideas a free pass.
Why don't we just get to the root of the problem and ban people? If you are a person, you are punishable by death.
All sorts of problems would just "go away".
The Laffer Curve? You've got to be kidding.
Wanting to pull that useless unproveable garbage into a logical argument probably means you're already losing.
and occasionally wearing women's underwear while online, which as we discussed, is strictly a comfort thing.
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
What right does some US state politician have to dictate how the rest of the world uses the internet? OK, so perhaps he can tell other Kentuckians (?) what they can, and cannot, do but outside of his own state he has no influence whatsoever. And please don't counter this with the old 'we invented it, we can dictate how it is used' argument. Its a big world and you are also part of it, but only a part. No other politician from any other nation should have, nor currently has, such a right either
Have a look at soylentnews.org for a different view
"Looks like another battle in the right for anonymous free speech"
What RIGHT would that be?
Last time I checked, we (in the US) had a Constitution-enshrined RIGHT to say what we wish.
Only the naive and troublemaking would wish it to be 'anonymous'.
Personally, I'd like to see it that everyone's name is on the front, sides, and backs of their cars. I bet people would drive much more nicely generally.
-Styopa
Get the message through that if you screw up you get voted out. It might take a few terms, but that might straighten them up.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
If this is the same Tim Couch who stunk it up with the Browns and was cut by the Packers then he has got to be one of the biggest cry babies ever. He's probably trying to get this rule past so he can find out who of us called him a douchebag when he was playing in the NFL. douchebag!
To any who happen to scroll down here and read this, I'd like to apologize on behalf of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. As I've said in other forums today, you have - very unfortunately - been exposed to something we usually refer to here as Local Politics. You see, one of the tenets of Local Politics here in KY is that, if nobody knows who you are, you must do something incredibly stupid/illegal/dickish/cowardly/unruly/whatever in order to gain name recognition. Now here's the good part: this needs to be done at the expense of taxpayers. Either monetarily (partially applicable here since we're paying for this joker to propose junk bills) or, more likely, pride. We are ashamed of this fool, and we sincerely apologize.
We ask for your thoughts and prayers during this difficult time. Hopefully, we'll take care of this little public problem of ours in November.
Once again, sorry you had to see that.
- WA
My sig sucks.
I encourage everyone to contact Mr. Couch and let him know how unfeasable and insulting this idea is. That measn well-thought and well-written messages, not
Rep. Couch's Page @ lrc.ky.gov
Again, please make sure your correspondence is professional and polite. The last thing we need is a bunch of idiots spamming his inbox and basically proving him right...
"So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
with politicians from any country that ramble on about banning this or that "on the Internet", as if it matters to the other 99.9999% of the Internet-using population what they do or think. It just exposes their ignorance (as well as the perceived ignorance of their constituency) when they say stupidass things like that.
Boggles the mind. It's about as useful to talk about banning anything on the Internet as it is to pass a law against any particular sex act. People will do what they're going to do.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
He's not anonymous anymore tim.couch@lrc.ky.gov Does he have a facebook page?
Here's what you do. Everyone in Kentucky who reads this article needs to write a letter (yes, a physical letter to be placed in an envelope with a postage stamp on it) commenting on the freedom of speech and sign it "Anonymous". Then post it at the post office to the mailing address of Tim Couch with a return address of the same. Be respectful (because angry words will only help him in his cause and make him "righteous") but informative on why anonymity is important and where this country would be without it.
For help in crafting your letter you might want to read the EFF article titled Speech: Anonimty
Next week, Tim Couch will likely want to add posting things through the mail as anonymous to the bill as well. ;)
Seppuku: Your solution to my problems!
Real Names? Is he serious? I don't know a single person who registers on any forum with their real name. I don't. I never have. I never will. I just don't trust any website with that kind of information,
Even if real names become required, verifying the veracity of such information is difficult and costly. Will people have to send in copies of their drivers licenses? 2 copies of utility bills? It would basically destroy all small free websites and forums that don't have the money to perform that kind of verification.
What he is asking is that people become verified at the same levels that banks will go to verify your information. If he is not going that far, then it is meaningless since forums like
Email addresses? You could almost read that sentence as saying "real" email addresses. Either way, that is also pointless, and even more so. Email confirmation only proves that there is a mail server, and that the mail server confirms that the mailbox exists. Gathering any kind of information from the owners of the mail server may prove pointless. Especially, if it is a big free service like GMail, Hotmail, etc.
Attempting to provide a definitive identification for all such postings on the Internet is just ridiculous. The best you could hope for is the legal right to pursue the IP address as far as you can go by forcing the cooperation of the ISP's and forums by access to all the logs. That is already available in some situations through subpoenas.
Once again, this may come down to encryption ultimately, as projects like TOR allow truly anonymous exit nodes for people to create email addresses, register profiles, and post anonymously. As long as encryption is allowed, you cannot stop this kind of behavior.
Ohhhh, and then there is the fact that the servers could be outside the jurisdiction of Kentucky and Kentucky's only response will be to build a great content management firewall around the state to protect people from bullies and hurtful names across the Internet.
This whole thing sounds like it straight out of a Dilbert comic.
"The answer is because they have immunity"
Which does nothing to prevent a lawsuit from being filed. Se that part where I said I didn't think it was going anywhere? Yeah, immunity covers that part.
"outside of some fairly narrowly-defined exceptions"
Such as breach of trust? Yes as a matter of fact, that's one of the exceptions.
I was suggesting a publicity exercise. You and GP both appear to have missed the point totally.
This would be mistaken and erroneous legal work. The presumption can not be that a person maybe guilty of something, in fact this bill decides such by implicating that concealed identity commits a crime or would be indicative of guilt. Guilt can not be established on the basis of refusal to give identification, this would be anti-constitutional and would violate his oath of office as a political representative. This needs to be brought to the attention of his community what he has done here.
And once the citizenry has been disarmed by its servants in the government, anonymity is the only way that free speech is possible. Take that away, and you no longer have free speech. Which ideas shall we label "hate" today? Those ideas we disagree with, of course.
I would imagine the easiest way to nullify this law, were it to pass, would be for websites to post a generic disclaimer that all comments posted are works of fiction written by the webmaster.
Forget international, what do they intend to do about Tennessee websites? This was a law proposed by a Kentucky state lawmaker, not a US Congressman from Kentucky. If this law passes, there won't be any websites that allow users' to post in Kentucky by the following week, they'll all move out of state. Of course it is still a bad law that should be opposed.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Here's his official web feedback form. Note that while it requires you to provide your name and address, nothing validates that those are actually your real name and address. You might want to point that out to the representative.
I thought the poster was referring to fine whiskeys.
I for one am in favor of this great new bill
Besides the fairly obvious offensive nature of this proposal against free speach, there is one other aspect of such moves that disturbes me greatly, since I still remember the days when in my [and neighboring] country free speach was non-existent, i.e. one could speak but retaliation was quick, swift. And thing is, such moves always raise the feeling in me that the ultimate purpose is to be able to go after people whose opinion is eventually disliked, which doesn't mean they will, but the possibility is there, and if the general trust towards authorities is not full (which I can tell it isn't, these days), then people just might hold back, even if the "threat" is not entirely real. And that is not a good thing in a democratic society. It's never a good move to make the people think that the government - or the different agencies - are on some higher level power pedestal where they can't be hurt and they are the only ones that know how to drive a country and the people's only prerogative is to submissively follow. Unfortunately, political rhetorics has evolved to such extent these days, that driving the masses to desired directions seems to be more a routine job than ever.
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
To a certain extent, I believe that the enforcability of the law is extremely important, or should I say issues related to the consequences of passing and enforcing a law like this.
Americans have grown accustomed and for some reason even comfortable with their ignorance with their lack of civil liberties. The government spends a great deal of time telling us (I include myself even though I no longer reside there) how free we are. Our children perform the pledge of allegiance every morning which suggests "with liberty and justice for all". Our country is founded on the principles of a often ignored document which suggests
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Well, hogwash. Many of the founding fathers are rolling in their graves right now (more than a few founding fathers were not quite so nobel) since America has now more or less abolished liberty as the definition was intended.
I've been all over the world and I must say that most other western countries are far more free in terms of liberty. It has become so bad in the US now that merriam webster has in fact altered the definition of Liberty in American dictionary to compensate for the modern US government's perception of Liberty.
Well, I've also noticed a growing trend of tech companies to leave the states or off-shore pretty much everything. People outside of America make jokes about how one day, the U.S. will simply outsource all jobs requiring education and just build enough Walmarts, Starbucks and McDonalds to employ the entire population.
So, laws like this will definately have the impact of moving blogs and other online services to other countries. Of course this by itself won't have a huge impact. It might effect a total of a thousand IT jobs, but those guys will find work elsewhere.
So the issue of enforcement is important since, while a law might be passed, it's not until someone tries to enforce it that the servers will be moved off-shore.
Now, the best part is, I'm waiting to see the first attempt by this politician moron that lacks the knowledge to understand that the Internet is not actually a U.S. only technology to suggest extradition of a European running a server which allows anonymous postings.
Kentucky state lawmaker Tim Couch wants to ban anonymous posting on the internet in order to 'cut down on online bullying', which he says has been 'a particular problem in eastern Kentucky.'
Other things that have been a 'particular problem in eastern Kentucky':
incest
illegal moonshine stills
poor dental hygiene
lack of education
lack of footwear
The nut.
(Illegally posted content! Woot!)
serious business
Instead of posting as Anonymous Coward, we'll all be posting as Tim Couch, Kentucky
So we'd have to identify who we are? This can mean but one thing: I'M Sparticus!
Pancakes. Oh I blew it.
"It guarantees summary dismissal"
No, it doesn't, you're wrong.
"You cannot sue a lawmaker for introducing legislation"
No, but you CAN sue a lawmaker for breach of trust and misuse of public funds, WHICH IS WHAT I SUGGESTED. It's up to the court to decide whether that occurred.
If you're not even going to read what I wrote (you know the part where I said breach of trust is one exception that lawmakers CAN be sued for) why are you replying at all?
I know that this law would be difficult to enforce, and that we'd all like to be able to post our political views, ask difficult questions, and engage in other harmless and even noble behaviors anonymously, but cyberbullying is real and it can happen to any one.
Ironically, I was online under a pseudonym at time. This was the fall of 2003. I did not know the word "cyberbullying," but something about this group felt very funny, so I thought my avatar would be happier there than I was. I'd had some bitter experiences with smaller ladies' groups. http://tacheiru.us/unfettered/defunct.html
Here is the group my "personna" joined's URL. I'm not sure they are even active.
http://www.geocities.com/trueheartsofgold/
Haldis, my alter-ego (She's a bit more than a pseudonym. I've been online as her http://hopefulviper.us/haldis for seven years so she has a separate history and if I do something under her name, I say she did it. This helps me keep track of who I was when I did what.) soon had an inbox of overflowing mail and in among the letters from the Yahoogroup that was so overloading the servers at the time, it took three days to clear. In among these gems, came some very ugly poison pen letters from a throwaway email address. The emails accuesd my personna of having "an immoral relationship" with her boyfriend and said she'd better watch herself or something vaguely bad would happen. This sounds a lot milder as a description than it did in real life. There were also ugly messages left on the remotely loaded web board, my avatar had on her web site. She deleted some of them. I think there may be one or two left up.
My avatar and I were both frightened. The avatar went to the list owner to complain. The list owner told her to be careful and watch it. We both interpreted this as the fact that the listowner did not want any bullies on her list and that she would do what she could to keep up her list's good name.
Call it a miscalculation. The bullying continued. Haldis (my avatar) and I searched for ISP's and other clues and we managed to find the bully's identity. Meanwhile, Haldis got sick of the list and the way that they had gone after another member. Haldis ripped up a glurge just to see the reaction. She got thrown off the list but the email took three days to stop. She got to see the grand pile-up and pile-on that followed her ouster. Haldis also learned that the list owner had been in cahoots with the bully.
Haldis had no choice but to email two cease and desist letters signed by her and witnessed by her fictional suite mates (Haldis is much younger than I and was a freshwoman in college at the time this all occured). The threat sounded real enough and the cyberbullies were history.
I can still find letters I wrote about this at the time...
Letter 1 -- Psycho by the Pound 11/4/03
I took a nap and then Haldis had to score Web Leagues. Suffice it to say the scoring set up at ZOID is much better. I counted 70 ballots by hand. I had reason to dread doing it.
I also did some thinking about the attack on Haldis. I tried to figure out what is provoking it. Haldis' political page is a possibility. Thadea's remarks about the crassness of competing a memorial page and site fighter demographics could be another. A third possibility is that the attacker "Squeakychair" is just crazy.
I mean you don't like someone for some reason that you meet on a fairly open and unmoderated mailing list that brings in women from all over, you either have it out with them in public or you write them a confronting letter that you sign with your real name or you let it go. This crap with threats and taunts which almost feels like blackmail, feels crazy and crazy making.
So the question is w
Please visit ZOID CITY Community and Community Competition http://www.zc2zc3.st
Does this law assume that all sites have adequate protections for storing and securing personal info? I would not trust every site I post on to protect my personal info from being abused. Scaring everyone into always providing real names and addresses when asked could be quite the boon for identity thieves.