backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 46 comment(s) - last by hathost.. on Mar 14 at 4:57 PM

Rep. Tim Couch proposes legislation to ban Internet anonymity; knows of its impending doom and doesn't follow through

Anonymity is one of the great things about the internet.  The web is one place where people can be whoever they want, or say whatever they want.  But according to one Kentucky lawmaker, attention should be drawn to the anonymous bullying.

Tim Couch proposed a bill criminalizing anonymous internet posting (HB775) and would mandate posters to give up their complete name, mailing address, and e-mail address.  The information would have to be posted on websites alongside any comments made on the Internet.  Failure for any website to require this or any person to give up their information will result in a $500 fine.   That sum is just for the first offense; it is a $1,000 fine for any following offenses.

There are certain obvious flaws with the proposed bill such as the infringement on First Amendment rights, and the state’s ability to regulate Internet, or rather their inability to do so.  The most important flaw in this bill is that it only includes websites hosted out of Kentucky.  Even if the bill was passed, people would see very little effect from it. 

Couch admits that the bill is unlikely to get passed and is unconstitutional. He notes that his goal with this move is that he just wants to make aware the “bullying” that takes place on the internet.

"I think right now (online posting) is pretty much just on its own. It's a machine that's going to go its own way," said Couch in an interview with the Lexington Herald-Leader. "The state can try to pass some rules, but I don't really think it would do anything."

Lawmakers in the past have sidestepped censoring internet anonymity with other laws, like libel.  Just in this case as in others in the past, it is the rights of the First Amendment that come into question.

"Some nasty things have been said about high school kids in my district, usually by other kids," Couch said. "The adults get in on it, too … When you're anonymous, you can say anything you want to about someone, and nobody knows who you are." 

In other cases, courts explored the idea of devaluing a public company via negative anonymous comments.  But there still exists that idea that a price will always have to be paid in order to retain our rights.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

1st Amendment?
By rcc on 3/12/2008 4:47:38 PM , Rating: 2
Ok, let me start by saying this bill should die.

However, the article indicates that it would be a violation of the 1st Amendment. How?




RE: 1st Amendment?
By Cobra Commander on 3/12/2008 4:53:43 PM , Rating: 4
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press ; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


RE: 1st Amendment?
By masher2 (blog) on 3/12/2008 5:06:44 PM , Rating: 5
I always find it amazing that people who so easily interpret "freedom of speech" to cover anonymous blog postings can turn around and interpret "right to bear arms" as "we can ban any weapons whenever and whereever we wish".

And, for the record, I also believe anonymous postings are protected speech. I simply wish the same standards of interpretation would apply to the entire Constitution.


RE: 1st Amendment?
By Xerio on 3/12/2008 5:18:42 PM , Rating: 1
Amen! Unfortunately, people always have and always will twist things to fit some freaking agenda.


RE: 1st Amendment?
By Ryanman on 3/13/2008 3:09:29 PM , Rating: 2
and I find it amazing when people interpret the "right to bear arms" as the right to take all weapons from law abiding citizens because of propaganda, fear, ignorance, and inflated statistics.


RE: 1st Amendment?
By charliee on 3/12/08, Rating: -1
RE: 1st Amendment?
By DigitalFreak on 3/12/2008 7:35:59 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
"right to bear arms"


THAT would explain why all the Kentucky hicks walk around with sleeveless shirts! They got confused.


RE: 1st Amendment?
By ATWindsor on 3/13/2008 4:16:49 AM , Rating: 2
I think I have never met anyone who wants to let people have any kind of weapon, or even any kind of small arms weapon. As I see it the "diffrent sides" just wants to set the "point of illegality" at diffrent places in the spectrum.


RE: 1st Amendment?
By Spivonious on 3/13/2008 9:29:00 AM , Rating: 2
The second amendment was put in there so the military/federal government couldn't be more powerful than the people. Do I feel that I need an assault rifle? No, but should I ever feel that need, then I should be able to go and get one.


RE: 1st Amendment?
By ATWindsor on 3/13/2008 12:10:17 PM , Rating: 2
But should you be able to get a rocket launcher? Or a Davy Crocket? Most people put the limit somewhere on how effective weapons people should be legally able to own.


RE: 1st Amendment?
By Spivonious on 3/13/2008 3:11:37 PM , Rating: 2
Not to get into an argument but yes.

If the federal government has rocket launchers, I should be able to get one too, so if the government becomes a tyranny, we can band together and actually have a chance against the army. That is the purpose of the 2nd amendment.


RE: 1st Amendment?
By ATWindsor on 3/13/2008 3:17:42 PM , Rating: 3
Ok, that is intereseting, I think you are the first i hae seen with this view. You have no problem with people beeing able to buy nuclear weapons, and neither with biological og chemical then i guess, no matter how great their effectivness?

AtW


RE: 1st Amendment?
By hathost on 3/14/2008 4:57:35 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not not too worried that the military would side with the government in the event it turns into a tyranny, on the other hand...it's happened so many times in the past that I'd prefer to allow any piece of military hardware available to the civilian populace and live with the consequences than strip citizens of the right to defend themselves. The gov't should recieve its power from the citizens not the other way around. The best way to fix problems in a free society is more freedom.


RE: 1st Amendment?
By Ryanman on 3/13/2008 3:12:29 PM , Rating: 2
You should. The only way you can truly stop people from obtaining weapons is to make them prohibitively expensive to produce.
The only reason I DON'T support being able to purchase such "extreme" weapons is that, should the government organize a coup, the benefits of guerilla warfare will make nearly all small arms usable in a revolution. It's the saving grace of gun control laws.


RE: 1st Amendment?
By rcc on 3/12/2008 5:30:09 PM , Rating: 2
Yup, I read it too. However, they are not restricting what you can say, only requiring that you take credit for you.

Let me reiterate though, I'm not in favor of the bill, I just find it funny how "freedom of speech" in the online world has come to mean "doing what I want with impunity".

Before they worry about this issue too much, they should require junk mailers, spammers, telemarketers, etc. to provide full Name, Address, Phone, etc. info on every piece of garbage they send out so you know with whom to discuss it.

On a separate note, I think it should be a shooting offense to post articles, blogs, or pretty much anything on the internet without a date, and preferably a time stamp.


RE: 1st Amendment?
By ebakke on 3/12/2008 8:13:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
On a separate note, I think it should be a shooting offense to post articles, blogs, or pretty much anything on the internet without a date, and preferably a time stamp.


And search engines should order my results by the most recent timestamp.


RE: 1st Amendment?
By Will14 on 3/13/2008 10:55:35 AM , Rating: 2
I agree on adding date and time stamps to everything.

I also agree all spammers, telemarketers etc should provide all information. So when I address the fact that they've called me 8 times in the last 2 weeks. Ask to talk to their manager about their illegal use of an auto-dialer to someone on the do not call list. When they then put me on hold for 20 minutes and hang up. I can report them. Not that it matters because these particular spam/scammers are in India anyway.


Maybe...
By Xodus Maximus on 3/12/2008 4:36:33 PM , Rating: 5
Kentucky should just stick to not believing in evolution, and leave the magical things they don't comprehend,like the internet, alone.

Anonymity is the only freedom mankind has!




RE: Maybe...
By mmntech on 3/12/2008 4:45:28 PM , Rating: 2
Doesn't the Peoples' Republic of China ban internet anonymity? Something to think about.


RE: Maybe...
By AlvinCool on 3/12/2008 4:46:29 PM , Rating: 5
Thats so untrue

They believe in evolution and practice it more than your family I bet. You are just jealous cause you only got 10 fingers and 10 toes.


RE: Maybe...
By AToZKillin on 3/12/2008 5:46:55 PM , Rating: 4
LOL.


RE: Maybe...
By FingerMeElmo87 on 3/12/08, Rating: -1
RE: Maybe...
By JackBurton on 3/12/2008 5:04:40 PM , Rating: 2
If I had the power, I would rate your post a 6.

Technology and Kentucky do not go together very well. It frightens and confuses them.


RE: Maybe...
By AstroCreep on 3/12/2008 8:36:43 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Technology and Kentucky do not go together very well.

Nor does technology and moonshine, so it's like a double-negative.


RE: Maybe...
By Chaser on 3/12/08, Rating: -1
RE: Maybe...
By Runiteshark on 3/12/2008 5:54:11 PM , Rating: 2
Lol, only a CCNA.

The internet is serious business you know, and the words were typed, thus were not produced from his mouth.

Just thought I'd let a well educated fellow such as yourself know.


RE: Maybe...
By Xodus Maximus on 3/12/2008 5:58:22 PM , Rating: 4
I am just a stereotypical anonymous internet poster, however am neither Microsoft or Cisco certified for such action so I fall short in comparisons of cup size.

I simply wanted to tell you to lighten up, I have nothing to contradict your statement, what you say is true. What annoys me is when people take personal offense to an anonymous internet posting, like mine. I hate to tell you but you are being as ignorant as this politician, because you obviously don't "get it" when it comes to the internet, just let it go :) and life will be much better...

So there is no need to drop trouser and show me your badges from now on, because its not worth it ;)
MCSE, CCNA, PhD, PhD 64, PhD 64X2, and PhD 2 Duo


RE: Maybe...
By Runiteshark on 3/12/2008 6:14:24 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
PhD, PhD 64, PhD 64X2, and PhD 2 Duo


Quality lulz.


RE: Maybe...
By Chaser on 3/13/2008 3:20:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
just let it go and life will be much better...


And it would behoove you to practice what you preach friend.


RE: Maybe...
By INeedCache on 3/12/2008 11:03:39 PM , Rating: 2
No, mankind is still free to believe. I hope Kentucky does indeed stick to not believing in evolution. They're obviously smarter than you think.


Huh?
By i3arracuda on 3/12/2008 4:50:13 PM , Rating: 3
quote:

Couch admits that the bill is unlikely to get passed and is unconstitutional. He notes that his goal with this move is that he just wants to make aware the “bullying” that takes place on the internet.

...

"I think right now (online posting) is pretty much just on its own. It's a machine that's going to go its own way," said Couch in an interview with the Lexington Herald-Leader. "The state can try to pass some rules, but I don't really think it would do anything."

...

"Some nasty things have been said about high school kids in my district, usually by other kids," Couch said. "The adults get in on it, too … When you're anonymous, you can say anything you want to about someone, and nobody knows who you are."


I would think that the number of kids killed by psychopaths whilst attending class would be a much greater cause for concern than what some e-thug said on THE INTERNETS.




RE: Huh?
By anotherdude on 3/12/2008 5:07:54 PM , Rating: 5
Anonymity is a saftey factor. Last thing I want is a stalker at my door just becasue I commented sowewhere that Apple sucks.


RE: Huh?
By gillt021 on 3/13/2008 2:28:40 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I would think that the number of kids killed by psychopaths whilst attending class would be a much greater cause for concern than what some e-thug said on THE INTERNETS

I'm not supporting the bill or anything but I think the bullying that he is referring to is part of the cause for concern. Constant bullying is feeding the anger and aggression of the psychopath. Verbal and physical bullying is usually considered as a factor in the behavior of the kids that end up shooting classmates. The bullying has just extended from in school only to on the internet where they can post 24/7.
Not really my exact point but a little googling brought up this link, kind of explains how teens take what they read on the net very seriously.
http://jezebel.com/gossip/hell-is-other-people/if-...


lol...
By dr4gon on 3/12/2008 4:40:00 PM , Rating: 5
imagine if every wikipedia article was broken down word by word citing the exact date, time, name, address, and email address it was posted by. what a confusing reference that would be.




correction...
By kattanna on 3/12/2008 4:36:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
He notes that his goal with this move is that he just wants to make sure he gets press to get re-elected


correction in bold

;>)




RE: correction...
By Hakuryu on 3/12/2008 4:50:02 PM , Rating: 2
You are probably right. He admits his bill probably won't get passed and is unconstitutional, yet wastes his time bringing it forward. Is it really to shine light on a problem affecting 0.0001% of people, or to get his name in the press and rile up people that believe in anonymity?

Hell, why stop with name and address... there are probably a few John Smiths that live on First Avenue across the USA... we need to give up our social security number with that info also, to be able to correctly identify people. After all, if someone is calling you a nerd or a waste of life, they should be made prime targets for identity theft. /end sarcasm


Sigh...
By Baltir on 3/12/2008 10:04:01 PM , Rating: 2
As a Kentucky resident, please don't judge us all by this foolish proposal. I think we're dealing with another "series of tubes" bonehead.




RE: Sigh...
By gillt021 on 3/13/2008 1:53:18 AM , Rating: 2
I agree, Please don’t confuse one idiot for a whole state full of them. Besides, he knows it’s a stupid proposal he probably just wants the name of some high school kid that's posting something about his daughter. Here are a few people from Kentucky who were/are not idiots.

Rex Geveden Associate Administrator of NASA Born in Mayfield,KY
Robert H. Grubbs (b. 1942) 2005 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Born in Marshall County, raised in Paducah,KY
William Lipscomb (b. 1919) 1976 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Raised in Lexington
Garrett A. Morgan (1877–1963) Traffic light and gas mask inventor Born in Paris, KY
Thomas Hunt Morgan (1866–1945) 1933 Nobel Laureate in Physiology or Medicine Born in Lexington,KY
Phillip A. Sharp (b. 1944) 1993 Nobel Laureate in Physiology or Medicine Born in Falmouth, KY
Nathan Stubblefield (1860–1928) Inventor, demonstrated wireless radio Born in Murray, KY
John T. Thompson (1860–1940) Inventor of the "Tommy" Gun Born in Newport,KY
George Whitesides (b. 1939) Harvard University chemistry professor Born in Louisville, KY
Terrence W. Wilcutt (b. 1949) Astronaut Born in Russellville, KY
.......I could go on but you get the picture.


Obvious flaws
By fic2 on 3/12/2008 6:18:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
There are certain obvious flaws with the proposed bill such as the infringement on First Amendment rights, and the state’s ability to regulate Internet, or rather their inability to do so. The most important flaw in this bill is that it only includes websites hosted out of Kentucky.


I would think the most obvious flaw would be trying to track done who "anonymous" is to fine them. Do you fine the owner of the local WiFi hotsport for the stuff posted from the coffee house?




picture
By fic2 on 3/12/2008 6:19:04 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, love the picture - The Unknown Comic - brings back memories...

And, yes, I am that old.




Wow...
By VenomSymbiote on 3/12/2008 6:48:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
When you're anonymous ... nobody knows who you are.


*Head explodes from sheer awesomeness of that insight.




heh
By omnicronx on 3/12/2008 7:05:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
When you're anonymous, you can say anything you want to about someone, and nobody knows who you are."
I can also do the same thing at any rally or protest, other than possibly getting pictures of my face, you do not know my name where I am from, or what I do. The same could be said about a phone call over a pay phone, if I looked up someone randomly in a phone book and started swearing at them, would they be able to take any legal action? Probably not..

The only laws here that would apply are laws like slander, and that doesn't matter if its anonymous.




Doesn't surprise me
By DigitalFreak on 3/12/2008 7:39:19 PM , Rating: 2
These are the same morons who are suing some town in southern Ohio over a stone they pulled from the river.

Kentucky's state song is the dueling banjo theme from Deliverance.




Brilliant!
By cscpianoman on 3/12/2008 8:37:13 PM , Rating: 2
Now we can get even more spam, not only in email, but over the phone and snail mail as well. I'm sure every law-abiding spammer would respect my privacy and not inundate me with more garbage.

Sarcasm aside. How the heck, do you control this? How do you verify it? And what about the rest of the world that uses/peruses the internet? Good grief! Did the guy think past his ink and paper or the dollar?




By Will14 on 3/13/2008 10:50:54 AM , Rating: 2
Personally I don't want my address phone number e-mail etc being publicly posted on the internet everytime you go to post. Anyone see an issue with abuse with spam and identity theft/safety. I would never post on any of those type sites/forums etc. I love when lawmakers have no idea the full spectrum of the internet, and try to make laws because one bad thing happened and was on the news in their area. Lets try futily to fix this one time thing that happened(was the kid that killed theirself after getting mean myspace messages in Kentucky?). It is a pity more constituents don't realize how asinine a lot of these lawmakers ideas are.




wait a minute
By tastyratz on 3/12/2008 4:47:44 PM , Rating: 1
did he check with al gore for his permission as founding father of the internet first?




"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki