NJ is Completely and Utterly Wrong
New Jersey to Appoint Itself Internet Gestapo
This is completely absurd. For starters, rulings in courts uphold the concept that forums and blogs are constitutional protected by the first amendment. Secondly, there is no indication that freely protected speech must be made with the speakers identity being revealed. In a non-internet parallel, that would be like requiring every member of a demonstration to sign government documents indicating their name, telephone number and home of residence. Clearly not something the Courts would EVER require.
You can argue that this applies only to defamatory or slanderous speech, but this too is absurd. To be libelous and/or slanderous, speech must be held to be both known to be false, and intentionally malicious, and have had a real effect upon the reputation of the supposedly slandered. It has been clear that parody, satire, tabloids which feature Bat-Boy, and other similar methods of speech are rarely punishable under libel laws, because they do not have any substantial effect on a person's reputation. Similarly, any post which is made anonymously, on a forum, by "SxyChic18" (or whoever) is clearly seen as the singluarly held opinion of that one, anonymous individual, and of substantially reduced weight as a result.
And who died and made the New Jersey State Assembly Lord of the Internet? How does their state law in anyway impact upon myself, who does not reside in New Jersey? Am I to believe, that I am to be held to account by a law passed by law-makers with whom I have no redress, nor any vote, when I have not, in any way, entered into their jurisdiction in terra firma? Why do government entities immediately get RETARDED when an issue takes place in cyberspace instead in "THE REAL WORLD".
If this bill passes, the State Assembly of New Jersey are a bunch of Asshats.
-Anonymous Blogger
This is completely absurd. For starters, rulings in courts uphold the concept that forums and blogs are constitutional protected by the first amendment. Secondly, there is no indication that freely protected speech must be made with the speakers identity being revealed. In a non-internet parallel, that would be like requiring every member of a demonstration to sign government documents indicating their name, telephone number and home of residence. Clearly not something the Courts would EVER require.
You can argue that this applies only to defamatory or slanderous speech, but this too is absurd. To be libelous and/or slanderous, speech must be held to be both known to be false, and intentionally malicious, and have had a real effect upon the reputation of the supposedly slandered. It has been clear that parody, satire, tabloids which feature Bat-Boy, and other similar methods of speech are rarely punishable under libel laws, because they do not have any substantial effect on a person's reputation. Similarly, any post which is made anonymously, on a forum, by "SxyChic18" (or whoever) is clearly seen as the singluarly held opinion of that one, anonymous individual, and of substantially reduced weight as a result.
And who died and made the New Jersey State Assembly Lord of the Internet? How does their state law in anyway impact upon myself, who does not reside in New Jersey? Am I to believe, that I am to be held to account by a law passed by law-makers with whom I have no redress, nor any vote, when I have not, in any way, entered into their jurisdiction in terra firma? Why do government entities immediately get RETARDED when an issue takes place in cyberspace instead in "THE REAL WORLD".
If this bill passes, the State Assembly of New Jersey are a bunch of Asshats.
-Anonymous Blogger
2 Comments:
Dear Anonymous Blogger,
I wonder what will happen when NJ decides to take on Yahoo, Google or MSN? Being these are three of the most popular places to host forums, blogs and chat rooms.
I now wish for them to take someone on...just so the Supreme Court can stike it down.
Anonymous Responder
It is annoying to have to wait until someone sues somebody to have a completely inane and clearly unconstitutional law thrown out of court. In many ways I like the way the German Supreme Court works better, where any citizen may make a constitutional challenge to a law, whether they have been personally effected by the matter or not.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home