StitchInTime Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime. It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity. In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess. . . . For the rest of this article, see: http://news.com.com/Create+an+e-annoyance,+go+to+jail/2010-1028_3-6022491.html?part=rss&tag=6022491&subj=news Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 WELL....that's half the people on this forum busted ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exterus Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 (edited) By the way, my name is [removed]. Just for future reference. There, my ass is covered. Edited December 29, 2018 by Exterus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mav Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Yea the people who wrote that bill actually snuck in that part about anonymous annoyance online. Bush isnt too keen on reading up on things so he kinda blindly signed into being. As for disclosure of identify, what are they going to do make people post a copy of their drivers license or something? If I say my name is Maximillian Whoshemis then by all intents and purposes thats my name. What happens if someone "contends" that? Are we going to have to provide who we are now? I think was is more along the lines of e-mail spammers and such. How they plan on regulating it in private forums, is beyond me. If they do find a way, then most forums would go the way most illegal file servers go: to a different country where it's allowed. Then what, are they going to pass a bill saying we can no longer visit foreign hosted websites? I doubt it that goes aganist the entire purpose of the Internet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magestorm Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 This won't hold up in court. Freedom of speach in effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Another pointless unenforcable law from the infallible US legislature! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Well, I don't see how freedom of speech would be an issue here: It says that if you post a 'flaming message', you should also reveal your true identity... So I read that as saying that youy can still flame, but people will also know who you are after that, not only in personality, but also in identity... So freedom of speech is not in question. Anonimity is in question however... Might be some privacy law that could prevent this, but I don't know if there actually is such a thing. Since most courts will judge another persons dignity higher than a persons anonimity, last I heard... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S0V13T Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 So what happens if an Canadian citizen, 'annoys' an American citizen on a forum, that's hosted in Great Britian, and is owned by a Mexican? Does the Amercan still have the 'right' to sue someone who's homeland dose not recognize American law? It seems that all Americans do these days is file friviolus lawsuits for spilling hot coffee on themselves, attack other people, and generally act like pricks to non-americans. "Land of the Free", yeah right, maybe a couple of decades ago. That's Fredor V. Raspichokov, 742 Younge Street east, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msg4real Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 This seems very stupid and as anamerica they wont do any thing as the used words thast created loupholes so i would easily overturned. And S0V13T to you statment " It seems that all Americans do these days is file friviolus lawsuits " Only a SMALL percent do friviolus lawsuits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dBLOOD Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 Hmm... It's tipical american... they prove from time to time, that America IS the land of possibilities... im only sorry, they do it this way, with such more and more stupid laws... Trust me S0v... They THINK at least, that they have the right to say to any other country, how to do things... But usually they do it with military power... So as long as americans speak about this thing, and not trying to sue me by marching with military force against my country, there is nothing to worry about... nothing for me... :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Does the Amercan still have the 'right' to sue someone who's homeland dose not recognize American law? It seems that all Americans do these days is file friviolus lawsuits for spilling hot coffee on themselves, attack other people, and generally act like pricks to non-americans. "Land of the Free", yeah right, maybe a couple of decades ago. Chances are if you visit here (USA) you won't get killed (you will be overcharged for a hotel room and the like and a cab ride will cost you more). Chances are, if an American visits another country, he/she will be killed. Take your pick - we ain't all pricks... c4 :thinking: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostShadow Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 (edited) . Edited November 25, 2021 by GhostShadow . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 Very very true. A good sign of an American troublemaker is usually green teeth, a red neck and a nazi flag tattoo. Of course then there are the not so obvious ones...most of them carry a bible ;) c4 B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
remedyu Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 Depends on where the American is, to be killed. Higher possibility if he goes to Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, etc :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 America is a good case of a vocal minority... electing a globally hated leader! Lovely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 The American presidency always goes where the money is! Sad fact of American life... c4 :( :( :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
str82u Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 You know what I hate? You will It's all about ME ME ME You can do what you want in the USA as long as you don't disrespect others. When they start putting lines out, where should they be drawn? You can have an African American College Fund, but not white kids college fund. If we are going to live by tenant that all men (and women) are created equal, we need to act like it. It's becoming more Legalistic I think, people suing others for stuff, but don't take from me and don't ask! A lot of people want to take, but giving is a whole different story. I'm too jaded maybe, but I believe we get more than we give, at some point. It all comes around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 SNIPPET: You can have an African American College Fund' date=' but not white kids college fund. If we are going to live by tenant that all men (and women) are created equal, we need to act like it.[/quote'] I don't remember who said it but I once heard someone say that "the scales of justice have been unbalanced for so long that they had to swing fully in the other direction for a while" (or words to that effect). I took that to mean that whites had it all their way for so long and now it's the black's turn. That's why there's no WTV (white TV) but there is a BTV (black TV)...etc... c4 :thinking: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steveo Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 The analogy is a good one, but it's positive discrimination, which is always a poor substitute for eaqul oppertunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 I totally agree. It's like college scholarship funds that favor blacks. They are given extra points because of their skin color. I know it's meant to help minorities but it is also "positive discrimination". When I was a kid I thought by the time I grew up all this discrimination crap would be over and done with. Wishful thinking :thinking: c4 B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now