Bush thank you for getting rid of trolls.

[Sir Cairbre]

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid= ... 2&from=rss

Does that mean we can prosecute trolls?

[Winfang]

Ah yes. Too bad Ru isn't on the boards anymore. He would have been a worthy canidate.

[Mawr]

I can always make a few fake accounts to cheer you up, Winfang.

[Winfang]

Next person that uses a Hitler methaphor is getting sued!

[Ander_Elessedil]

Hitler used metaphors.

[Andrek]

While I am a fervent advocate of personal liberty.....this is definitely a "dont believe everything you read on teh internet" story. Here's the text of the law.

SEC. 113. PREVENTING CYBERSTALKING.

(a) In General- Paragraph (1) of section 223(h) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 223(h)(1)) is amended--

(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking `and' at the end;

(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and'; and

(3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

`(C) in the case of subparagraph (C) of subsection (a)(1), includes 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 (as such term is defined in section 1104 of the Internet Tax Freedom Act (47 U.S.C. 151 note)).'.

(b) Rule of Construction- This section and the amendment made by this section may not be construed to affect the meaning given the term `telecommunications device' in section 223(h)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as in effect before the date of the enactment of this section.

SEC. 114. CRIMINAL PROVISION RELATING TO STALKING.

(a) Interstate Stalking- Section 2261A of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`Sec. 2261A. Stalking

`Whoever--

`(1) travels in interstate or foreign commerce or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or enters or leaves Indian country, with the intent to kill, injure, harass, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate another person, and in the course of, or as a result of, such travel places that person in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to, or causes substantial emotional distress to that person, a member of the immediate family (as defined in section 115) of that person, or the spouse or intimate partner of that person; or

`(2) with the intent--

`(A) to kill, injure, harass, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person in another State or tribal jurisdiction or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States; or

`(B) to place a person in another State or tribal jurisdiction, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to--

`(i) that person;

`(ii) a member of the immediate family (as defined in section 115 of that person; or

`(iii) a spouse or intimate partner of that person;

uses the mail, any interactive computer service, or any facility of interstate or foreign commerce to engage in a course of conduct that causes substantial emotional distress to that person or places that person in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to, any of the persons described in clauses (i) through (iii) of subparagraph (B);

shall be punished as provided in section 2261(b) of this title.'.

(b) Enhanced Penalties for Stalking- Section 2261(b) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(6) Whoever commits the crime of stalking in violation of a temporary or permanent civil or criminal injunction, restraining order, no-contact order, or other order described in section 2266 of title 18, United States Code, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than 1 year.'.

Sec 223 (a)(1)

Whoever (1) in interstate or foreign communications (A) by means of telecommunications device knowingly--(i)make, creates or solicits, and (ii) initiates transmission of, any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication which is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent, with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass another person; Same thing about minors(C) makes a telephone call or utilizes a telecommunications device, whether or not conversation or communication ensues, without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person at the called number, or who receives communications;

So, while the word 'annoy' is in the actual law, it only applies if you're sending them porn with the intent to annoy, and doing so annonymously.

Being verbally/literally annoying all by itself doesnt count, the least you must be doing to fall under this law is intentionally annoying someone by annonymously sending them unwanted porn. I think most of us can safely avoid that, and I dont think my First Ammendment rights are being infringed by not being able to send porn to people who have already told me they dont want to see my porn. I assume they would have had to tell me because in order for this law to apply, I have to know that they dont want my porn, but send it to them anyway...annonymously.

While I agree that the word "annoy" doesnt have any business being a part of American law, the effects of this particular passage are not nearly as dire as the author of that article wants you to think, nor as some in this thread seem to believe.

http://belegarth.com/board/posting.php? ... e&p=218150