Nicklas Johnson · morons.org - Annoying anonymously now illegal

Reader-Submitted: Annoying anonymously now illegal

Please Support our Featured Partners!

YouHaveBO.com: The Internet's Premier Anonymous BO Notification Service
Want Your Link Here?: Find out how to get free advertising with our partnership program!
Overheard in SF: Heard inbetween the rabbit squeezing and the carrot munching

Very vague wording has been signed into law that prohibits anonymously posting annoying things to the internet.
Posted by annoyed vulpin on Jan. 12, 2006 17:12 UTC
48 comments from readers. Join the discussion!

What is it with dangerously vague new phrases with no legal definition? According to this article, Senator Arlen Specter used the typical congressional tactic of slipping this idiotic provision (known as §113) into another bill that would be politically dangerous to not vote for. While that practice is itself reprehensible, it is unfortunately how things seem to be done in Congress.

Now, as many who've been on the internet can attest to, annoyance is part and parcel of the experience. Usenet flamewars are a thing of legend at times. Some livejournal communities exist purely to vent spleen about annoyances on the net. What is harmless kidding to you may be intensely annoying to others - when there's nothing but text, it's easy to misinterpret such things as sarcasm and irony. Using the word "annoy" in a law is dangerous due to the chilling effect it can have on speech this law wasn't intended to cover.

§113 has been signed into law. Let the challenges to it begin!

-Vulpin

Find similar articles

Enter an alias. If your chosen alias is already registered, you will be prompted to enter another one. Maximum length: 40 characters. HTML not allowed.

If you are registered, enter your password to be logged in.
Keep me logged in on this computer
Enter your message. Some HTML is permitted including the p,br,a,strong and em tags. CSS attributes and javascript are not allowed. You may leave blank lines to denote paragraphs or use the paragraph tag. If you use the paragraph tag for one paragraph, you must use it for all of them. Maximum length is 8192 characters.

Press the Post button to post your message now, or use the Preview button to preview your posting. If you used any HTML, you must preview once before posting.

Posted by KNW from Alberta on Jan. 12, 2006 18:12

I for one welcome our new computer-illiterate, can't-open-Solitaire-without-help, dust-farting tyrants with open arms and look forward to labouring in thier underground sugar caves.

You get the feeling this law came into being because Bush was dumbfounded when he opened a site that Cheney hadn't already screened and found out that there are people who don't share his opinion?

Damn, I'm glad to be Canadian, today!

sparrow: Gee, don't get too comfortable. I hear the Tories, who are prone to be...

KNW: Give Harper a minority, just who is he going to partner with to stay in power?...

Posted by Pansy Bedwetter on Jan. 12, 2006 18:37

[insert annoying comment here]

Dr. Sleaze: You are annoying me with your generic annoying comment. :-)

Pansy Bedwetter: Well your annoyance at my annoying comment is anoying me!

Dr. Sleaze: And I'm equally annoyed due to your annoyance caused by my annoying comment on...

The FBI: You're both under arrest.

Bedsy Panwetter: Bite me!

Pansy Bedwetter: *bites*

thenineteen: had to thank you, especially THEFBI. i'm having my usual hideous day and that...

Posted by splorp! from North Mexico aka SoCal on Jan. 12, 2006 20:04

Wouldn't this be an unjustified limitation of free speech? (ie, yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater). The way it's being described, posting something like "George Bush looks a lot like a chimp" might annoy him and therefor subject me to the penalties. I am more or less anonymous here.

splorp!
Evil Bastard

KNW: Call yourself a journalist and make it a first ammendment issue. Then watch him...

GWTPict: I find your comparison of my species with GWB very annoying, expect the SBI...

KNW: Gee, has Cheney even LET Bush look at a globe lately?

blogger331546408: Is there anybody who is not under surveillance ? Nope. Even those doing the...

Posted by Possibly a Bedwetter, Not a Pansy from Hell (Sacramento), CA on Jan. 12, 2006 21:30

Allow me to repeat the wisdom of the illustrious Mr. Smith, as stated by Affleck the hack:

"That's what the internet is for; slandering others anonymously!"

Possibly a Bedwetter, Not a Pansy: Wait a minute, that wasn't Affleck the Hack...it was Jason Lee the Exceedingly...

Posted by Morrighu from Hunting Dragons on Jan. 12, 2006 21:36

At the risk of annoying Senator Arlen Specter, I hereby rename you Senator Dumbass.

Why?

1) You did this crap under the guise of helping women. 2) It was dirty and underhanded but rather public so you had to know you were going to get busted 3) If you really wanted to help women, you'd do something like protect our privacy instead of forcing us to disclose our real names on the internet.

MO-RON! You don't even rate an in-DUH-vidual for this.

Momom: He didn't stick it in there to help women. He knew that piece of legislation...

Posted by Pansy B. on Jan. 12, 2006 23:22

Bush & Co. are so lame!

Posted by Pansy B. on Jan. 12, 2006 23:26

Bush is the AntiChrist!! His minions are the Republican party and Christian Conservatives.

Posted by Gabu from Victoria, BC on Jan. 13, 2006 02:53

The good news, though, is the following:

1. If you say who you are, it's okay.
2. If you don't say who you are, it's ridiculously difficult to find out who you are, and I honestly doubt the police or FBI would even bother most of the time.

All in all, a thoroughly useless law.

CHUCKY: But is it? In reading the main story link, it appears to be just another step...

Christopher Waldrop: Speaking highly non-anonymously (do you think anyone would purposely make up...

CHUCKY: Whether useless NOW or not, this gives 'Big Bro' the opportunity to establish a...

Khazwossname: Seems like the next step would simply be to move the burden of policing onto...

CHUCKY: Of course! Now how did I forget to lay adherance & policing on the server?...

KNW: Right, Iran's a problem. PNAC calls for nuclear proliferation, but only if the...

Cold in MN: Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of the PNAC (at all). I just think they have...

KNW: Yeah, he's a loose cannon, but if someone who was on the warpath decided to...

Cold in MN: You make excellent points. I have to agree with you for the most part. Bush's...

Cold in MN: Chucky, In all due respect, I think you give the PNAC too much credit, you have...

Gabu: To my knowledge, the IP address you broadcast over the internet cannot be...

Posted by kelemvor from UK on Jan. 13, 2006 03:41

There's a line in the linked article - "intent to annoy". If you're just blogging something that happened to you, who are you intending to annoy?

vulpin: That's where the chilling effect comes in. Let's say I was posting a fight to...

Posted by blogger331546408 on Jan. 13, 2006 07:48

Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005 [H.R.3402]

[in alphabetical order]

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/150487.php

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060110-5947.html

http://benli.typepad.com/annex_jp/2006/01/violence_agains.html

http://billstclair.com/blog/ [scroll one-quarter way down the page]

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Annoying_someone_online_becomes_federal_crime

http://izrailit.blogspot.com/ [scroll one-fifth way down the page]

http://kairosnews.org/node/4571

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

http://southdakotapolitics.blogs.com/south_dakota_politics/2006/week2/index.html#a0008337143

http://telicthoughts.com/?p=490

http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/30682

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/ [scroll half-way down the page]

http://www.ioerror.us/2006/01/09/go-to-jail-for-being-annoying-online/

http://www.ncadv.org/publicpolicy/ViolenceAgainstWomenAct2005_165.html

http://www.now.org/issues/violence/12-20-05vawapassage.html

http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=8768

http://www.ubersite.com/m/82060

http://www.watchblog.com/cgi-bin/wb-comments.cgi?entry_id=3121

http://www.watchblog.com/thirdparty/archives/003121.html

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=476155

http://www.webofblogs.org/ [scroll half-way down the page]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

http://it.news.yahoo.com/05012006/38/immagine/president-bush-smiles-during-the-signing-of-the-violence-against.html

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-3402

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/01/20060105-3.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/01/images/20060105-3_20060105p010506pm-0-515h.html

(thread closed)

blogger331546408: A few of these refer to the previous edition of the same link. That would be...

Posted by Pansy Bedwetter on Jan. 13, 2006 09:51

This thing won't survive its first trip to court. Overly vague and overly broad. Not to worry.

pozcyclist: Well, Pansy's probably right, however, given who we seem to be letting onto the...

spatula: Then the conservative activist judges will find corporate rights in the...

KNW: I dunno, freedom of speech is pretty hard to quash without a lot of...

blogger331546408: "...freedom of speech is pretty hard to quash without a lot of...

blogger331546408: **undesirable freedom of speech** can be what a totalitarian regime believes is...

blogger331546408: Joe McCarthy was an extremist Republican Senator. He made unsubstantiated...

KNW: Nice points, but, for the love of the FSM, could you NOT use 1/4 of a page to...

Posted by microbe on Jan. 16, 2006 11:58

Shouldn't our so-called Governement using law enforcing resources to track and capture "Actual Terrorists and Criminals" not a bunch of people stating a viewpoint on a weblog or posting nasty photos on the net. I hope the mid-term election give the seats in the House and the Senate to people that aren't paranoid crocthety old fascists, Bushite cronies, and certain Christians that only speak from a rich white male only who sign bullshit laws like this one into existence.

Reynard: The problem is that "Actual Terrorists and Criminals" currently equals "a bunch...