Anonymous postings are now illegal?

[kurth]

ANONYMOUS POSTINGS ILLEGAL?
Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - FreeMarketNews.com

President Bush signed a bill last week that would prohibit the posting of annoying Web messages or the sending of annoying e-mails, without providing one's true identity in the process, according to an online column by Declan McCullagh of Cnet. "In other words," notes McCullagh, "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."

He discovered the provision, buried deep inside the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act, and notes that it may spell the end for a number of discussion lists on the Internet, including the longstanding Usenet facility. Criminal penalties for disobeying the new law reportedly include stiff fines and two years in prison. Marv Johnson, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, is cited as observing that "he use of the word 'annoy' is particularly problematic," since "What's annoying to one person may not be annoying to someone else."

The excuse for the inclusion of this extraneous provision, in a bill designed to protect women against physical assault, is Sec. 113, titled "Preventing Cyberstalking," which McCullagh says "rewrites existing telephone harassment law" by prohibiting anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy." As has happened so often in recent times, it was attached to the unrelated, must-pass bill to fund the Department of Justice, by Sen. Arlen Specter and its other sponsors, with the intention, as the writer declares, "to make it politically unfeasible for politicians to oppose the measure." The bill passed the House on a voice vote, while the Senate's approval was unanimous.

http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=5092

[tanyev]

1. Appalling as this is, will it at least keep the blasted porn and Viagra

emails out of my mailbox? I find them very annoying.

[Ilsa]

3. I doubt we'll see much of a decrease in those annoying

emails. Do you think a repug judge will do anything to hamper commerce, especially for W's big pharma?

But we can hope, can't we? ;)

[hang a left]

6. No...

there will be selective enforcement...if you catch my drift.

[rodeodance]

2. I read about this a week or two ago, I wonder which Congresspeople

actually knew it was it there?--and what they intend to do about it?

[Toots]

4. "the Senate's approval was unanimous."

:puke:

[pretzel4gore]

5. bush is criminal, why's fox guarding the henhouse (news)?

bush, the man with ten thousand assholes aka the national repuke brain trustees...
dick cheney, bush asshole
donald rumhell, bush asshole
gonzales the lil brown one att. gen bush asshole
michael medved, bush *hole
condiliar ricearoni, bush *
wooof blitzer, bushhole
lou dobs, bush asshill
ari fliesher, tom ridge, colin powell, ted olsen, bush *'s
bush voters, bush etc
pigmedia, bush *
well you can't blame bush for being fecetious....

[IndianaGreen]

7. Kick

put this together with the bills pending in some state legislatures to establish statewide intelligence organizations to keep track of Bush's enemies, and you will see what some of us "fringe" leftists have been saying since Congress passed PATRIOT without reading it.

Bill will set up Indiana intelligence center

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=151x3797

[helderheid]

8. does that mean I have to use my real name here or I'm breaking the law?

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DrDebug]

10. Welcome to DU, anonymous user

:toast:

Spammers are generally Republicans and tend to live in Florida, so they are exempt...

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[helderheid]

13. Welcome to DU.

[DrDebug]

14. Dissent as in Republican statements is not allowed

That's why the people are gathered here to talk with like minded people because being left is considered "underground" nowadays and most here don't want to discuss the Republican side.

As far as your identity goes. It is not important. Neither is mine. So that was a joke part. I am all for anonymous posting on websites and only give your name to people which you have learned to trust and with whom you have bonded. In fact it is pretty much the standard rule for internet interaction.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blonndee]

17. Here's a dissenting view:

Your sig line sucks.

[sweetheart]

20. They be quashed

We've all crushed the republican arguments in to dust around here.
They don't have any credible argument, it is not shallow roots, but
"unitary executive" or "off reservation" as we used to call it before
criminals took over.

Then by the ontology, the very naming of their stupid soundbytes, they
seek to create a mirage of totalitiarian control. This be a patriarchal
control, done by colonization. Colonists of the other side want to
establish a settlement from which they can attack the locals, and
settlements by republican colonists are refused turf here.

If you get banned from DU and need a board, www.progressiveindependent.com
is a good board. The board is unfettered as an "independent" is whatever
POV you have, not the one of the party that's trying to win elections.

[Servotron]

19. Look at it this way.....

...at least you set a new record for yourself. See if you can hit 6 posts next time :hi:

[sweetheart]

11. Would that a nation be open to truth

but as it is not, then truthtellers need protection.

Welcome to DU truth light.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[democracyindanger]

18. NO.

The CNET opinion column was wrong. McCullagh was playing Chicken Little.