A Federal Offense to Grief?

The article.

The relevent text from the law:

"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."


Does anybody think this will have an effect on SL? I know that not everybody is American... it IS a federal crime now, but I'm not sure how American federal law works in with international law and all of that.

A law is only as good as it's enforceability.

This is actually a very dangerous law, a serious affront to our right to free speach. Hate griefers all you want, ban them from private systems all you want, but don't fall into the trap of believing the government is in the right on this one. Congress has way overstepped its constitutional authority in declaring that it's now illegal to be annoying. They can't do that. Private citizens can banish anyone they want from their private property for any reason they choose, but the government cannot. This new law is just the latest in a long list of signs that our cherished democracy is hanging dangerously over the edge of precipice from which there soon may be no return.

It's been rightly illegal to interfere maliciously with computer networks for many years now, so grid attackers have been felons all along. This new law doesn't change or improve upon that principle in any way. What it actually does is state that almost anything you say online or over the telephone can be declared illegal if someone is offended by it. Well guess what? There's absolutely nothing you can possibly say that won't offend someone. Basically this is an excuse to shut down websites and individuals the government doesn't like. Make no mistake about. This is an act of facism, plain and simple.

Back when W was first running for president, he devoted a lot of resources toward trying to shut down websites that made fun of him. When a reporter asked him how he could justify these actions while running for an office that would require him to defend free speach, he said simply, "There aught to be limits to freedom." He wasn't kidding, and apparently his buddies in congress feel exactly the same way.

Disgusting.

I'll need to dig up where I read it earlier - however, what I read indicated that this law was somewhat toothless, and couldnt be applied that way?

The excerpt from the law you pasted there seems to have a lot of '...'s denoting that theres more to it than that?

First, I should like to nominate Chosen Few for president even with the expectation that he'd sooner flee the country than accept.

Second, should this crap ever see the light of day, even the Supremes plus Alito would have to strike it down on free speech, free association, and privacy bases. That is, until Georgie rolls the tanks into their chambers.

Didn't we fight a war a couple hundred years ago about things just like this? Plus ca change...

this also covers use of the 'detain' scripts that the 'cops' use to keep griefers for lindens

both would and could be charged

omg we are all going to jail!!!!!!! OMG most of you annoy me to some extent or another and I'm sure i annoy MANY just as well. so we might as well just all turn our selves in for being annoying!!!!

THE LINE STARTS BEHIND ME

Thankfully, Kris Ritter isnt American.

Right Kris?

*huggles*

edit: uh, actually wait.. that might be a personal attack! I'm not exactly sure, but I'll AR you in the assumption it was. And my friend is a forum moderator now, so nyah!

yay

I agree with you absolutely Chosen, and had actually heard of Bush trying to shut down the websites, and his comment, before.

Adam, it may be misrepresented; the excerpt I posted was the exact one posted in the article I linked.

Introvert... I am sad to say that this law has already seen the light of day and been passed.

Clarification: should anyone attempt to enforce this and prosecute a citizen under this tripe... which actually increases my admiration for the authors of the US constitution and their friends across the pond who contributed ideas. I do so love the societal "lag" built into that fine document; this too shall pass as did the HUAC before it.

I can't see a real case about this not getting laughed out of its lowest level venue, which of course will be followed by them trying to write a worse law followed by them shooting for the repeal of that pesky Amendment I...

This one will be about as hard to enforce as cracking down on email spammers is. Truth be told, as the world becomes more and more enmeshed in the metaverse each day, governments are constantly faced with the problem of how to enforce any rules within it. And with all the international laws that come in to play, I don't really see how they could ever hope to fully enforce laws in the metaverse. Of course, we Americans have seen our fair share of goverment "rolling in the tanks" in an attempt to take over the internet: Take the whole Napster stinkfest from a years back. I STILL don't see how file sharing in cyberspace is any more of a crime than making a cassette copy of a CD (but who uses cassettes anymore) and does anyone remember when the post office wanted to enforce a charge for email? Why do you think postage stamps just went up again?

Oh thanks! I forgot I have to go to the post office. Haven't been to pick up my mail in 2 weeks!

Harass, I can understand there being penalties for. But aren't there already laws against harassment that would cover online harassment? Making mere annoyance a federal offense is just nutty. I wonder what they were thinking?

Month by month, I cannot help but be drawn closer to the conclusion that the Great American Experiment has failed. This saddens me.

Since this isnt in Off Topic, Im assuming we're discussing how it could affect SL. But I dont see any issues with SL. I quoted the key point that takes us all "off the hook". As long as they know our SL names and its a conversation between two SL identities, then technically our identity is known. Sure they dont know our real name but that could be made available from LL if law enforcement got involved. Therefore, since our identities arent being hidden, we are free to annoy, threaten, etc each other all legally, within the TOS of course.

Let’s start at the top. This law was passed to close loopholes in the current anti-stalking laws that are already on the books. I words used in this law were already on the books in regards to the phone but with VoIP and other “broadband phones” the law would not apply. Secondly, since Second Life is a private world which you need an account with a password to log onto, this law will not apply. It is intended to stop cyperstalking and close the loopholes that technology opened up and I believe that is what will come of it. If it is too broad I am sure that it will be stuck down as a violation of the 1st amendment anyway.

So Weebl is goin to jail?

*cries*