Slashdot Mirror


Legislation In New York To Ban Anonymous Speech Online

Fluffeh writes "Republican Assemblyman Jim Conte said, '[this] turns the spotlight on cyberbullies by forcing them to reveal their identity.' Republican Senator Thomas O'Mara added, '[this will] help lend some accountability to the Internet age.' The two are sponsoring a bill that would ban any New York-based websites from allowing comments (or well, anything) to be posted unless the person posting it attaches their name to it. But the bill also goes further, saying New York-based websites, such as blogs and newspapers, must 'remove any comments posted on his or her website by an anonymous poster unless such anonymous poster agrees to attach his or her name to the post.'"

42 of 398 comments (clear)

  1. Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    21 2. A WEB SITE ADMINISTRATOR UPON REQUEST SHALL REMOVE ANY COMMENTS
    22 POSTED ON HIS OR HER WEB SITE BY AN ANONYMOUS POSTER UNLESS SUCH ANONY-
    23 MOUS POSTER AGREES TO ATTACH HIS OR HER NAME TO THE POST AND CONFIRMS
    24 THAT HIS OR HER IP ADDRESS, LEGAL NAME, AND HOME ADDRESS ARE ACCURATE.
    25 ALL WEB SITE ADMINISTRATORS SHALL HAVE A CONTACT NUMBER OR E-MAIL
    26 ADDRESS POSTED FOR SUCH REMOVAL REQUESTS, CLEARLY VISIBLE IN ANY
    27 SECTIONS WHERE COMMENTS ARE POSTED.

    What about CDNs physically located in NY that serve news and video from very popular sites? And how are you going to verify all this information? Like, I go through Tor, I tell you I'm Jim Conte, I give you his home address and then I verify that I'm indeed him and all this time someone on the staff of this news site is ... doing what exactly? Verifying how? Are they calling ISPs and saying "Hey, does this IP address check out for this home address? And how on Earth are they going to be able to afford to do this for anonymous comments?

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by durrr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They are technological illiterates like most legislators and belive that human laws work like laws of nature, if you write them down they'll start enforcing themself.

      Did i mention they're also first rate morons?

    2. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The New York State Legislature has been a complete retard rodeo for as long as I've been paying attention to it. Anyone with half a brain uses it as a jumping-off point to a better office, i.e. US Congressman, NYS comptroller, lieutenant governor, etc.

      Occasionally there will be one smart person who decides to remain there to corral them in and lead them in a solid, purposeful direction. Unfortunately this "one smart person" is often a crook, and the "solid, purposeful direction" is therefore, well, you get the idea. The last one was Joe Bruno; he's currently in prison.

      This is why I never bought the whole "we should leave more things up to the states to decide" line of argument: as bad as the US Congress is, state legislatures are generally solidly worse; they just don't get as much press. Or maybe this is just a New York thing and other states are different, I don't know.

    3. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by HungryHobo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      they can't, that's the point. So anon comments will effectively be banned.

      since verifying the person is who they say they are is prohibitively hard it'll also do away with user generated content and we can go back to the way things were in the good old days with massive media companies telling us what to think without every tom dick and harry giving their opinion.

    4. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by SJHillman · · Score: 3, Funny

      Having been to Albany to talk to state legislators a few times, they are mostly idiots. There's a few of them wouldn't even give us a meeting unless they knew we were bringing "a gift." That said, not all of them are idiots. I've gone to a baseball game or two with one of the reps from where I grew up... unfortunately, the smart ones usually stay away from technology issues simply because they know that they don't know enough to make any laws about it.

      Also, I didn't know laws of nature needed to be written down to be in effect. If we burn every book mentioning gravity, maybe we can get flying cars fast!

    5. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by freeweaver · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes it is impossible to enforce. But please don't think for a second that the people writing these "laws" are just stupid, that would be dangerous.

      The intention behind this move is simply to create a legal framework which allows those in control to censor ANY comment which is contrary to propagandised opinion.

      If you or I make a valid yet controversial comment on a website based in NY, the appropriate people will be alerted, the comment will be taken down, and a statement will be issued in its place:

      "This commenters identification could not be verified."

    6. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by c0lo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What about CDNs physically located in NY that serve news and video from very popular sites? And how are you going to verify all this information? Like, I go through Tor, I tell you I'm Jim Conte, I give you his home address and then I verify that I'm indeed him and all this time someone on the staff of this news site is ... doing what exactly? Verifying how? Are they calling ISPs and saying "Hey, does this IP address check out for this home address? And how on Earth are they going to be able to afford to do this for anonymous comments?

      Show me you palm, Jim Conte. Hmmm... yes, yes... see that line there? I can tell you by the look of it: your wish will be granted, in a very near future, no Websites will be hosted and no CDN-es will have presence in NY... but when it happens, if you'll remind your voters about your success, they'll throw rotten eggs at you.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    7. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hello? Thomas Paine published Common Sense anonymously. James Madison published The Federalist Papers anonymously, and Ben Franklin published a whole host of material anonymously. Anonymous political discourse was absolutely instrumental in creating the United States.

    8. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by silentcoder · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >You could hand write everything, but making copies would be very troublesome and time consuming.

      Oh and this line... guess those historians also got wrong the date of the invention of the printing press - since this event which changed the world forever is supposed to have happened a long time before the U.S. constitution got it's first amendment.
      Wait... didn't Benjamin Franklin use to run a newspaper ? With a printing press ?

      If anything we have LESS anonymity now than we had back then. Nobody 400 years ago could actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt which printing press produced a copy, or where it was originally typeset.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    9. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by 1u3hr · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, when the first amendment was written, pretty much all speech was not anonymous. The first amendment was passed in 1789. ... . The people who have caused political change have done so by being intentionally not anonymous.

      Wrong. Very wrong.

      The Federalist Papers
      The Federalist Papers are a series of 85 articles or essays promoting the ratification of the United States Constitution written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. Seventy-seven of the essays were published serially in The Independent Journal and The New York Packet between October 1787 and August 1788. ...At the time of publication, the authorship of the articles was a closely guarded secret

    10. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by AngryDeuce · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is why I never bought the whole "we should leave more things up to the states to decide" line of argument

      As someone living in Wisconsin, I completely agree.

      I shudder to think how much worse the fuckheads in this state's government would have screwed us if they'd had more power. They did enough damage with the power they have. We've got a full-blown witch hunt going on right now over people who signed a recall petition against Governor Walker, our Supreme Court justices are physically assaulting each other, disenfranchisement efforts are in full swing, and women now have to prove to a doctor they're not being coerced before they're allowed to have an abortion (because, you know, there are tons of forced abortions in this country, am I right?) and allowing schools to restrict sex-ed programs to abstinence-only...

      Luckily we can still recall our reps, although they did everything they could to try and take that right away from us, too.

    11. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by Cytotoxic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      so then, how is it you know these people published anonymously...and exactly what it was they had published? seems it wasn't so anonymous.

      Because they won.

    12. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by Joce640k · · Score: 3, Funny

      The New York State Legislature has been a complete retard rodeo for as long as I've been paying attention to it.

      I'm waiting for a flurry of posts all made by "Republican Assemblyman Jim Conte"

      --
      No sig today...
    13. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Federalist Papers, you moron.

      Fucking hell but it's a sad testament to the American education system that you could say something like that.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    14. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by Bigby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So you are saying it is better that those things happen to 300,000,000 people instead of 5,700,000?

    15. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by beowulfcluster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So where is Slashdot based? There wouldn't be many comments left on here if anonymous ones are banned. The cowards aren't the only ones, obviously.

    16. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by Lucky75 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When you give power to the local states, you're not making it smaller, you're just shifting the power to someone else who is just as corrupt and gets less media attention.

      --
      DNA -- National Dyslexic Association
    17. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by KlomDark · · Score: 3, Funny

      /20, /21 - whatever it takes...

    18. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by zzsmirkzz · · Score: 4, Informative

      When you give power to the local states, you're not making it smaller, you're just shifting the power to someone else who is just as corrupt and gets less media attention.

      and lives close to you, where you can make your opinion heard. Not to mention their sphere of influence is smaller. The point in having people with the power to do things that affect you most, closer to you, and on a smaller scale, is obvious (or at least, it should be). Besides, if they are all morons, why don't you run against them next election and win. It's easier on a local/state scale than on the federal level (which is why you don't want everything handled at the federal level).

    19. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by tnk1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are you shitting me? I sit on an HOA Board of Directors for only one reason: no one else wants to do the job. My predecessor *died* and I was brought in because they needed to prevent receivership and loss of property value for everyone that would entail. I do my best to avoid as much of it as I can.

      Let me make this clear. HOAs may seem like they are not accountable. I have joked that I could spend money building a statue of myself in the common area and no one could stop us, but do you know why? Because no one can be bothered to actually a) go to meetings, b) read the shit we send them, c) vote. That doesn't mean, however, that I am less accountable. I am a lot more accountable than some senator or representative. I "represent" only 200 households, not 300,000. And all of those people know where I live. When I take a walk, I invariably pass their houses. The thing is, no one is holding me accountable for anything. The most we get are people bitching at us at hearings when they didn't read the rules and painted their deck puke green and now they have to fix it. And I wouldn't even care about that as much, except as a Director, I have a legal obligation to act in the best interests of the community and according to it's legally enacted rules and covenants.

      We literally have to collect proxies and elect ourselves at the annual meeting. If that's a tyranny, then it is one that is being run with the fullest cooperation of the tyrannized.

      There is no reason this has to be, except the fact that no one wants to bother. And I don't blame them. Being on an HOA Board isn't privilege, it's work. If you wanted to move to my community and get elected to the board, I will be happy to step down. Of course, I will move from the community as soon as I can if you are a moron and enforce nothing, but please don't get the idea that there is no accountability. There is plenty, it's just that no one bothers to care.

    20. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by mcgrew · · Score: 3, Informative

      No research says marijuana is addictive. Show me a single case of anyone going to the ER for pot. It IS total bullshit, fucking lies.

      Look at the Partnership For A Drug Free Anerica's web site. They claimed for years that marijuana was carcinogous, until a cople of years ago when they were trying to demonstrate its link to cancer and found that there was no statistical difference in cancer rates between pot smokers and nonsmokers (and the pot smokers had fewer cancers than nonsmokers), and that cigarette smokers who also smoked pot had half as many cancers as those who only smoked cigs.

      Now the site says "marijuana contains carcinogens". Fucking morons, PFADFA lies about marijuana, then when the dumb kids find out that they've been lied to about pot, they don't believe them about crack and heroin, ahich ARE addictive. They're contributing to the very drug abuse they're trying to stop!

      And who is behind this "partnership"? The drug lords have apparently been bribing every damned politician in the country.

    21. Re:Ridiculous, Impossible, Etc. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is why I never bought the whole "we should leave more things up to the states to decide" line of argument

      And this is exactly why I DO buy the whole "we should leave more things up to the states to decide" line of argument. State legislatures can do some pretty stupid things, true. But the damage they can do is limited and localized for the most part.

      Just wait until the US Congress hears about this proposed law and starts salivating at the prospects. I'd rather have New York websites instead of all US websites on my "do not visit" list.

      Posted anonymously just because I can (for now).

  2. Fucking retarded... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Guess I won't be posting on any more websites hosted in New York.

    What a great way to drive business away from your state. How long before they're all relocated in Jersey? Days?

  3. I propose an alternative law ... by KillaBeave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... that sissies are not allowed on the internet. Is trolling/cyber-bullying bad, sure it is and I'm not condoning it. It's just sad that people are so thin-skinned that some goobers in politics feel the need to attempt to outlaw trollish comments!

    Of course this probably has nothing to do with cyber-bulling or trolling and likely has everything to do with stopping leaks, dissent and general repression of free speech. After all, there is no speech more free than anonymous speech. Are they banning anon tips to the police and anon letters to the editor as well?

    1. Re:I propose an alternative law ... by SJHillman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is why children generally shouldn't be online unsupervised any more than they should be wandering the town unsupervised. By the time they're old enough to do that, they're usually old enough to cope with a little cyber bullying.

    2. Re:I propose an alternative law ... by KillaBeave · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Very true, but I hope that I can instill in my daughter enough self-confidence and common sense that she'll be able to brush this type of stuff off as the worthless ramblings/rants of people who are lashing out because they are subconsciously aware that they are "peaking" in HS ... and life is all downhill for them.

      Everyone had to deal with this type of stuff growing up in one way or another. How one dealt with it says quite a lot about their character or lack there of. Dealing with assholes is a fact of life that will never go away and a life skill that we all sadly must learn. Thankfully my daughter is only 3 and I've got a while before I need to deal with this type stuff.

      I very much agree that there is currently a large failure in schools to mitigate these situations in meatspace. I really think they're harping about the "cyber" part of it because there's a paper trail for them to fall back on.

    3. Re:I propose an alternative law ... by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      We always wandered the town unsupervised. Sure we got into a little bit of trouble, but it was a lot better than the current state, where children never go outside, and we have massive problems with obesity. I think it's kind of sad that the baseball fields in my area never get used except for little league games. We used to always play baseball, hockey, football, whatever. Go knock on the doors the doors of every kind in the neighborhood until you had enough people to play, and start a game. Online isn't any different. You just have to teach your kids how to deal with people causing problems. On the internet, it's so easy. If you don't like what someone else is saying, just go somewhere else.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  4. Federalist Papers by mykos · · Score: 4, Informative

    Good thing we didn't have laws like this when the Federalist Papers were written.

  5. So maybe now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    you fuckers will start treating AC posts with some respect!

  6. Another reason not to live in New York by J'raxis · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This will probably cost New York a pretty penny if it passes and they get sued over it.

    Fortunately, crap like this wouldn't even make it out of the gate in New Hampshire, where I live, not after our legislature created a "constitutional review" standing committee a couple years ago. Any bill that a legislator believes to be possibly unconstitutional gets referred to that committee after coming out of its first committee, and they get to attach their recommendation when the bill gets voted on by the full legislature.

  7. Out of touch legislators by stevegee58 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just goes to show how out of touch our legislators have become to believe it's even technically possible, let alone constitutional.
    They're so disconnected from reality (i.e. the normal lives of their constituents) that it's like being ruled by space aliens.

  8. Anonymity = Free Speech by CuteSteveJobs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anonymity is necessary for Joe Public to exercise his right to free speech. The rich and powerful can't crush him like a bug if they don't know who he is.

  9. Consider... by martinux · · Score: 3, Funny

    Listen, I'm not saying that anyone who posts anonymously is definitely racist, I'm just saying that we can't currently prove that they aren't.

    - MickB1942.

  10. My name is Jim Conte and I'm a clueless legislator by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 3, Funny

    In the US, you can call yourself anything you want to, as long as you aren't trying to defraud someone. While they *might* be able to enforce this for NY residents, people who live in other states or countries would be free to do as they pleased.

    I'm Jim Conte, you're Jim Conte, we're all JC. If this bill passes, I propose that slashdot change "Anonymous Coward" to "Jim Conte" (Oh, I see, he just wants to go down in history with Ted "Series of Tubes" Stevens, and Santorum)

    --
    All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
  11. Irony by AlKaMo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This law would likely do exactly the opposite of what it's theoretically intended to do. When someone posts something that you don't like, you'll have all the information you need to stalk and harass the poster. Forget online bullying, this would enable physical bullying.

  12. Re:Hi, I'm Anonymous Coward... by 6Yankee · · Score: 5, Funny

    Something tells me "Jim Conte" and "Thomas O'Mara" will be doing a lot of comment posting if this goes through...

  13. This won't take long by gruntled · · Score: 4, Informative

    In McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, a 1995 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, the Court found that "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."

    1. Re:This won't take long by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Also see Talley v California, a 1960 US Supreme Court decision declaring that a local ordinance banning the posting of anonymous handbills was unconstitutional. The Court said:

      "There can be no doubt that such an identification requirement would tend to restrict freedom to distribute information and thereby freedom of expression. "Liberty of circulating is as essential to that freedom as liberty of publishing; indeed, without the circulation, the publication would be of little value." Lovell v. Griffin, 303 U.S., at 452 .

      Anonymous pamphlets, leaflets, brochures and even books have played an important role in the progress of mankind. Persecuted groups and sects from time to time throughout history have been able to criticize oppressive practices and laws either anonymously or not at all. The obnoxious press licensing law of England, which was also enforced on the Colonies was due in part to the knowledge that exposure of the names of printers, writers and distributors would lessen the circulation of literature critical of the government. The old seditious libel cases in England show the lengths to which government had to go to find out who was responsible for books that were obnoxious [362 U.S. 60, 65] to the rulers. John Lilburne was whipped, pilloried and fined for refusing to answer questions designed to get evidence to convict him or someone else for the secret distribution of books in England. Two Puritan Ministers, John Penry and John Udal, were sentenced to death on charges that they were responsible for writing, printing or publishing books. 6 Before the Revolutionary War colonial patriots frequently had to conceal their authorship or distribution of literature that easily could have brought down on them prosecutions by English-controlled courts. Along about that time the Letters of Junius were written and the identity of their author is unknown to this day. 7 Even the Federalist Papers, written in favor of the adoption of our Constitution, were published under fictitious names. It is plain that anonymity has sometimes been assumed for the most constructive purposes."

      Someone in New York should study up on their constitutional law.

  14. Re:My name is Jim Conte and I'm a clueless legisla by Jim+Conte · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm Jim Conte, wtf are you talking about?

  15. that's backwards by PJ6 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    '[this will] help lend some accountability to the Internet age.'

    Why don't we focus on transparency and accountability in our leadership first?

    How could the problems caused by any individual even begin to compare to the damage government failures cause?

  16. Works for me, if they... by rickb928 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    apply this to all media, including print and radio.

    What? You can't really verify someone's identity when they call in to a radio show? And those letters to-the-editor are similarly also difficult to ascertain the true authorship of?

    Oh my, we've NEVER had any way to do this? The horror!

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  17. Re:So now you guys LIKE Anonymous Cowards? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Many Slashdotters might not read or reply to Anonymous Cowards as a general rule, but they'll defend their right to comment!

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.