Flaming a federal crime!?!?!?!

[ViRidIAnLoNGBoW]

http://news.com.com/Create+an+e-annoyance%2C+go+to+jail/2010-1028_3-6022491.html?part=rss&tag=6022491&subj=news

[Jacob Orlove]

Here's the actual relevant language of the law, straight from the article:

"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."

(emphasis mine)

[Harkius]

Yes, but it will almost never be enforced. It is a basic law, with a lot of room for discretion. The basic gist is that it will almost never really be used, but in extreme cases, when people are repeatedly harrassing someone, then it may get used. But, general flaming will not be prosecuted, I think.

Besides, I can't wait till someone does get charged...this will show up in the Supreme Court, I am sure. Freedom of Speech, and all. It will likely get the law (or at least the conviciton) tossed out.

Harkius

[Machinus]

This was part of a harassment bill, so I am pretty sure the use of the words "annoy" and "abuse" is narrow here. However, I expect many inane lawsuits from Alabama and Georgia in the coming months. Jack Thompson is probably already filing something.

[The Atog Lord]

Man, this is why I almost went to law school. Part of the hope and promise of the internet is the ability to speak without a name. In oppressive regeimes and under tyranical rule, speaking without a voice can become a necessary means of communication. Without being able to disclose your identity for fear of your life or that of your family, the internet offers a chance to express oneself without being able to be caught.

Yes, that might not apply to the us. But the government is so caught up in making the internet "safe" from evil-doers that they will eventually cut off plenty of legitimate users. I really hate it. So glad we're safe from the evil terrorists who spend their time flaming....

[Sylvester]

Build your own internet. Be it by using a huge VPN, freenet, or by sneakernet+wireless (*that* could provide immense throughput).

[Kasuras]

Am I the only one that finds it strange that people in the Netherlands get sentenced for 14 years for brutally murdering someone and you get 2 years in the US for annoying someone?

[Machinus]

Am I the only one that finds it strange that people in the Netherlands get sentenced for 14 years for brutally murdering someone and you get 2 years in the US for annoying someone?

The US also executes many people for murder. Americans also kill each other all the time for being annoying. So, 2 years in jail doesn't seem so bad.

[cssamerican]

What is stranger is some people only get 90 days for repeatably raping a child. The U.S. court system can be really erratic in the way it doles out it sentences for various crimes because it leaves too much discretion in the hands of individual judges. The case I cited was an extreme example of this; however, I personally know people who committed identical crimes and got radically different sentences. That is why I am leery of this law; it seems to leave too much up to discretion.

[Harkius]

Am I the only one that finds it strange that people in the Netherlands get sentenced for 14 years for brutally murdering someone and you get 2 years in the US for annoying someone?

Do you really think that this is the strangest thing about the Netherlands?

As far as this

What is stranger is some people only get 90 days for repeatably raping a child. The U.S. court system can be really erratic in the way it doles out it sentences for various crimes because it leaves too much discretion in the hands of individual judges. The case I cited was an extreme example of this; however, I personally know people who committed identical crimes and got radically different sentences. That is why I am leery of this law; it seems to leave too much up to discretion.

goes, that is a horrific case, and the example is extreme. There is a lot of silliness in the US legal system, but without some level of judicial discretion, there would be equally outrageous types of verdicts and sentencing. Mandatory sentencing comes with its own drawbacks, and they can easily enough be found on the Interweb. In the grand scheme of things, judicial discretion is a good reason to have the appeals process, which, naturally, brings its own pitfalls. The system isn't perfect, but discretion is probably the way to prevent the worst excesses of the judicial system.

Harkius