| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 7/9 |
| 2006/1/9-12 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:41301 Activity:low |
1/9 Attention Trollers:
It is now illegal to post messages anonymously that annoy others via
the Internet. Basically, it's already illegal to annoy someone
anonymously via telephone. However, someone added "communications
that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet" to the
existing law. See HR3402 Sec. 113.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.03402
[click "Text of Legislation", then #6]
http://tinyurl.com/dfw9t (cornell.edu)
http://csua.org/u/ejy (news.com)
Yes, it is still legal in most cases to "annoy" someone
non-anonymously via telephone and Internet.
\_ You're annoying me.
\_ Annoying? The whole net would collapse if that was ever taken
seriously.
\_ Apparently the law requires a prosecutor to prove "intent to
annoy," which sounds laughably difficult to me.
\_ but you're wrong. -tom
\_ But isn't that what makes proving a libel case so difficult
in an American court? The need to prove "intent to cause
damage?" (aka reading defendant's mind)
\_ No, libel has no bearing on the situation. The
difficulty with libel suits is that true statements,
or statements of opinion, are not libel, so you have
to show that the statement is based in fact (as opposed
to saying "he's an asshole," which is a matter of
opinino), and that the person saying it reasonably
should have known the statement was false, and that
people reading the statement could reasonably believe
it was true.
"Intent to annoy" is easy; any reasonable person
could see that, say, repeatedly sending explicit mail
to someone after they've explicitly told you not to,
or subscribing them to hundreds of mailing lists, or
whatever, is intended to annoy. -tom |
| 7/9 |
|
| thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.03402 THOMAS Home | Contact | Accessibility | Legal | FirstGov |
| tinyurl.com/dfw9t -> www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode47/usc_sec_47_00000223----000-.html Obscene or harassing telephone calls in the District of Columbia or in interstate or foreign communications Release date: 2005-03-17 Prohibited acts generally Whoever-- in interstate or foreign communications-- by means of a telecommunications device knowingly-- makes, creates, or solicits, and (ii) initiates the 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; by means of a telecommunications device knowingly-- makes, creates, or solicits, and (ii) initiates the transmission of, any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication which is obscene or indecent, knowing that the recipient of the communication is under 18 years of age, regardless of whether the maker of such communication placed the call or initiated the communication; 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 the communications; makes or causes the telephone of another repeatedly or continuously to ring, with intent to harass any person at the called number; or makes repeated telephone calls or repeatedly initiates communication with a telecommunications device, during which conversation or communication ensues, solely to harass any person at the called number or who receives the communication; or knowingly permits any telecommunications facility under his control to be used for any activity prohibited by paragraph with the intent that it be used for such activity, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. defense to prosecution Whoever knowingly-- within the United States, by means of telephone, makes (directly or by recording device) any obscene communication for commercial purposes to any person, regardless of whether the maker of such communication placed the call; or permits any telephone facility under such person's control to be used for an activity prohibited by subparagraph , shall be fined in accordance with title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. Whoever knowingly-- within the United States, by means of telephone, makes (directly or by recording device) any indecent communication for commercial purposes which is available to any person under 18 years of age or to any other person without that person's consent, regardless of whether the maker of such communication placed the call; or permits any telephone facility under such person's control to be used for an activity prohibited by subparagraph , shall be fined not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than six months, or both. It is a defense to prosecution under paragraph of this subsection that the defendant restricted access to the prohibited communication to persons 18 years of age or older in accordance with subsection of this section and with such procedures as the Commission may prescribe by regulation. In addition to the penalties under paragraph , whoever, within the United States, intentionally violates paragraph or shall be subject to a fine of not more than $50,000 for each violation. For purposes of this paragraph, each day of violation shall constitute a separate violation. In addition to the penalties under paragraphs , , and , whoever, within the United States, violates paragraph or shall be subject to a civil fine of not more than $50,000 for each violation. For purposes of this paragraph, each day of violation shall constitute a separate violation. A fine under this paragraph may be assessed either-- by a court, pursuant to civil action by the Commission or any attorney employed by the Commission who is designated by the Commission for such purposes, or (ii) by the Commission after appropriate administrative proceedings. The Attorney General may bring a suit in the appropriate district court of the United States to enjoin any act or practice which violates paragraph or . An injunction may be granted in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Restriction on access to subscribers by common carriers; judicial remedies respecting restrictions A common carrier within the District of Columbia or within any State, or in interstate or foreign commerce, shall not, to the extent technically feasible, provide access to a communication specified in subsection of this section from the telephone of any subscriber who has not previously requested in writing the carrier to provide access to such communication if the carrier collects from subscribers an identifiable charge for such communication that the carrier remits, in whole or in part, to the provider of such communication. Except as provided in paragraph , no cause of action may be brought in any court or administrative agency against any common carrier, or any of its affiliates, including their officers, directors, employees, agents, or authorized representatives on account of-- any action which the carrier demonstrates was taken in good faith to restrict access pursuant to paragraph of this subsection; or any access permitted-- in good faith reliance upon the lack of any representation by a provider of communications that communications provided by that provider are communications specified in subsection of this section, or (ii) because a specific representation by the provider did not allow the carrier, acting in good faith, a sufficient period to restrict access to restrict access to communications described in subsection of this section. Notwithstanding paragraph of this subsection, a provider of communications services to which subscribers are denied access pursuant to paragraph of this subsection may bring an action for a declaratory judgment or similar action in a court. Any such action shall be limited to the question of whether the communications which the provider seeks to provide fall within the category of communications to which the carrier will provide access only to subscribers who have previously requested such access. Sending or displaying offensive material to persons under 18 Whoever-- in interstate or foreign communications knowingly-- uses an interactive computer service to send to a specific person or persons under 18 years of age, or uses any interactive computer service to display in a manner available to a person under 18 years of age, any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards, sexual or excretory activities or organs, regardless of whether the user of such service placed the call or initiated the communication; or knowingly permits any telecommunications facility under such person's control to be used for an activity prohibited by paragraph with the intent that it be used for such activity, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. Defenses In addition to any other defenses available by law: No person shall be held to have violated subsection or of this section solely for providing access or connection to or from a facility, system, or network not under that person's control, including transmission, downloading, intermediate storage, access software, or other related capabilities that are incidental to providing such access or connection that does not include the creation of the content of the communication. The defenses provided by paragraph of this subsection shall not be applicable to a person who is a conspirator with an entity actively involved in the creation or knowing distribution of communications that violate this section, or who knowingly advertises the availability of such communications. The defenses provided in paragraph of this subsection shall not be applicable to a person who provides access or connection to a facility, system, or network engaged in the violation of this section that is owned or controlled by such person. No employer shall be held liable under this section... |
| csua.org/u/ejy -> news.com.com/Create+an+e-annoyance,+go+to+jail/2010-1028_3-6022491.html signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity. In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. "What's annoying to one person may not be annoying to someone else." It's illegal to annoy A new federal law states that when you annoy someone on the Internet, you must disclose your identity. 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... shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both." existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy." Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, and the section's other sponsors slipped it into an unrelated, must-pass bill to fund the Department of Justice. The plan: to make it politically infeasible for politicians to oppose the measure. The bill cleared the House of Representatives by voice vote, and the Senate unanimously approved it Dec. It was reasonable by comparison, and criminalized only using an "interactive computer service" to cause someone "substantial emotional harm." There are perfectly legitimate reasons to set up a Web site or write something incendiary without telling everyone exactly who you are. Think about it: A woman fired by a manager who demanded sexual favors wants to blog about it without divulging her full name. A frustrated citizen wants to send e-mail describing corruption in local government without worrying about reprisals. In each of those three cases, someone's probably going to be annoyed. obnoxious and profane postcards through e-mail could be imperiled. He added: "If you send an annoying message via the United States Post Office, do you have to reveal your identity?" Fein once sued to overturn part of the Communications Decency Act that outlawed transmitting indecent material "with intent to annoy." "I'm certainly not going to close the site down," Fein said on Friday. Our esteemed politicians can't seem to grasp this simple point, but the First Amendment protects our right to write something that annoys someone else. official bio), he'd realize that the law he signed cannot be squared with the Constitution he swore to uphold. And then he'd repeat what President Clinton did a decade ago when he felt compelled to sign a massive telecommunications law. He chronicles the busy intersection between technology and politics. Before that, he worked for several years as Washington bureau chief for Wired News. He has also worked as a reporter for The Netly News, Time magazine and HotWired. CES 2006 special coverage: It's a wrap From the conference rooms to the show floor, keynotes and parties, here's everything you need to know about the Consumer Electronics Show. Newsmaker: Wikipedia's co-founder eyes Digital Universe Larry Sanger explains his ambition to build a reliable source of freely accessible, publicly created information on the Web. |
| cornell.edu -> www.cornell.edu/ Cornell University SEARCH: go Pages People more options * Admissions * Academics * Research * Outreach * Collections * Student Life * Alumni Sage Hall spires framed by modern Uris Hall Sage Hall's restored spires Any person, any study - Ezra Cornell, 1865 Welcome >> * Colleges and Schools * Facts about Cornell * Diversity and Inclusiveness Visiting >> * Ithaca * New York * Doha * Visiting Cornell University * Virtual Tours and Live Views * Maps of Cornell Inside Cornell * Libraries * Cornell Leadership * Jobs at Cornell More About Cornell >> News >> * Section of movie poster for 'Roving Mars' Cornellians and rovers featured in Mars IMAX movie 'Roving Mars' is part drama, part suspense and a tribute to teamwork * Photo of Ronald Seeber Cornell and SUNY reach agreement with state on land-grant funding Land-grant and higher education funding will now be kept separate * Photo of Junior forward Mark McCutcheon Cornell sweeps No. Colgate and moves into first place in ECACHL McCutcheon nets second last-minute game winner of the season More Cornell News and Athletics >> Events >> Photo of a performer on stage * A Child of Life - A Monodrama by Michel El Ashkar Feb 6 * Harlem Globetrotters: Unstoppable! Feb 7 * Martin Luther King, Jr. |
| news.com -> news.com.com/ Intel shoots for dual-cores, wireless profits At the company's spring analyst meeting, executives outline Intel's plans, which include delivering dual-core chips and expanding in markets such as wireless communications. Search engines delete adware company Yahoo and Google disable links to controversial adware maker WhenU after the company is accused of engaging in unauthorized practices aimed at boosting its search rankings. Worm feeds on Sasser-infected computers Computers compromised by the Sasser worm may be vulnerable to a scavenging program that exploits a flaw in the software left behind by the worm, a security researcher warns. Microsoft shares Windows tools via open source The software powerhouse releases into the open-source community a series of pre-existing templates that developers can freely modify. Dell earnings meet expectations update The PC giant delivers first-quarter earnings that match earlier projections, as growth in international sales and printer sales help the company build on its recent momentum. PalmOne updates software for Treo 600 smart phone Among the issues addressed are enhancements to the browser and e-mail program as well as enhancements designed to improve the device's "audio-quality reliability." Court takes gag off antispam service A San Francisco judge lifts a temporary restraining order against SpamCop that prevented it from interfering with messages sent by OptIn, which is suing the antispam blocklist. |