Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Legislation In New York To Ban Anonymous Speech Online

Posted by Soulskill on from the enjoy-funding-the-internet-anonymity-police dept.

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.'"

11 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 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."

    3. 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.

    4. 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

    5. 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.

    6. 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.
  2. 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?

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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...