On GameSpot: Super Street Fighter IV confirmed!
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

January 16th, 2006

EFF: 'Annoy' law could damage right to anonymity

Posted by ZDNet @ January 16, 2006 @ 12:32 PM

Categories: Government technology

Tags: Subpoena, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Law, ZDNet

If  the new "annoy" provision of the Telecommunication Act goes unchallenged, says EFF attorney Kurt Opsahl, it opens very substantial restrictions on Internet users’ First Amendment rights. (Note that the law excludes "Internet computer services,"so the concern is chiefly with VoIP services. The law makes illegal anonymous communications  "with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person … who receives the communications."

Opsahl argues on the EFF site that restraint on anonymous speech is cause for concern.

As the Supreme Court has held, “Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority,” that “exemplifies the purpose” of the First Amendment: “to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation … at the hand of an intolerant society.” Accordingly, courts have routinely found that the constitutional right to speak anonymously must be carefully safeguarded.

There are already laws on the books that prohibit harassment, and one can use subpoenas — with judicial oversight — to unmask anonymous speakers that violate the law. There is no need to criminalize the very act of communicating anonymously, even if the recipient will annoyed by the communication.

Most importantly, the use of "annoy" is considerable broadening of the earlier law.

Prior versions of the bill limited it to acts which "causes substantial emotional harm to" the victim, but the lesser annoyance standard emerged in the final bill.

If this poorly drafted law (both before and after this provision) is not limited by the courts, it could open the door to invasive subpoenas for identity information. Under established case law, plaintiffs must demonstrate that they have viable claims against the defendant before a court will allow a subpoena for the defendant’s identity. Moreover, under this criminal provision, vague words like "annoy" could make it easier for aggressive prosecutors to allege an intent to annoy, and go after people who were only engaging in voracious public debate.

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 2 Talkback(s)
Yes, however....
You do not legislate against anonymity or free speech. You do legislate against theft of resources - fax paper, data volume fees, time required by employees to wade through the spam/junk/dislike mail... (Read the rest)
Posted by: Dr_Zinj Posted on: 01/19/06 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
What about the "functionally anonymous"?  archetuthus | 01/18/06
Yes, however....  Dr_Zinj | 01/19/06

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement

Recent Entries

advertisement
Click Here

Archives

Favorite Links

ZDNet Blogs

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

SmartPlanet

  • Thought-provoking progressive ideas on diverse topics that intersect with technology, business, and life, and matter to the world at large. Visit SmartPlanet
  • More from IBM
  • Innovate your business' process model, play against the market, compete against others on our scoreboards and WIN! Try INNOV8 2.0: A BPM Simulator
  • Enabling Real-World Business Transformation through IBM Service Management Read the EMA Analyst Report
Click Here