Your Rights Online: Bill Would Declare Your Blog a Weapon

[Bob Hubbard]

Your Rights Online: Bill Would Declare Your Blog a Weapon on Tuesday May 05, @01:46PM


Posted by kdawson on Tuesday May 05, @01:46PM
from the can't-say-that-it's-too-severe dept.
Mike writes "Law prof Eugene Volokh blogs about a US House of Representatives bill proposed by Rep. Linda T. Sanchez and 14 others that could make it a federal felony to use your blog, social media like MySpace and Facebook, or any other Web media 'to cause substantial emotional distress through "severe, repeated, and hostile" speech.' Rep. Sanchez and colleagues want to make it easier to prosecute any objectionable speech through a breathtakingly broad bill that would criminalize a wide range of speech protected by the First Amendment. The bill is called The Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act, and if passed into law (and if it survives constitutional challenge) it looks almost certain to be misused."
Read More...

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Vote Democrat. Freedom is a terrible thing, and it must be stopped in our lifetime.

 

[Flea]

They can pass it if they want, but it'll never stand up in court. It'll just make a bunch of lawyers rich until the Supreme Court shuts it down. Much like all the 10 Commandments displays in gummint buildings.

I'm a Democrat, and I'm all about free speech. I think this is a well-intentioned terrible idea. Our national budget has much larger priorities right now than picking a pointless fight over the 1st Amendment.

Gr.

 

[Empty Hands]

There has to be a balance. You yourself Bob posted the links to the family harassed by pictures of their dead daughter, and everyone in the thread roundly condemned it and suggested that the perpetrators should face charges. If some cyberbullies said and did the things in person that they do online they would definitely face charges. Free speech is not an unlimited right when it infringes on others' rights.

Is this bill the right way to thread the needle and strike the proper balance? I have no idea. But it is a red herring to claim free speech privileges for this sort of behavior. It is not protected speech offline, and it should not be protected speech online.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Here's my problem.

federal felony to use your blog, social media like MySpace and Facebook, or any other Web media 'to cause substantial emotional distress through "severe, repeated, and hostile" speech.'

Is repeated demands that Senator X step down for incompetence going to cause X "emotional distress" and be deemed "hostile"? Will the demander be charged then? See, I can see the morons we have in power going to that extent, to silence opponents. The Justice Dept. has already been turned over to the RIAA, so will they then use this as a legal hammer to silence RIAA critics? Will 3rd party's be browbeaten into the ground for daring to upset the Secretary of whatever? These are legitconcerns as our government has proven over and over again that it has no problems squashing dissent when they can get away with it.

 

[Empty Hands]

Here's my problem.

I agree with your concerns. As I said, I have no idea if this bill is the right way to go about it. Responding to the intent of the bill though with "Freedom is a terrible thing" implies that any attempt to curtail speech on the web is wrongheaded. My view: if you can't say it in person, you shouldn't be able to say it on the web. This includes the usual exemptions to free speech such as harassment and incitement.

 

[LuckyKBoxer]

Seriously?
What would this bill do that is not already illegal to do?
The last I heard there were laws against harassment.
It just seems to me another way for the criminals running our government right now to take more rights away, justify their paychecks, and control people.
I have a novel Ideal, why don't we try to enforce the laws we already have before we go trying to make new ones that require stealing more money from us in taxes to hire more yes men that sit around and do nothing more then try to figure out more ways to steal our money, rights and freedom.

 

[CuongNhuka]

"Law prof Eugene Volokh blogs about a US House of Representatives bill proposed by Rep. Linda T. Sanchez and 14 others that could make it a federal felony to use your blog, social media like MySpace and Facebook, or any other Web media 'to cause substantial emotional distress through "severe, repeated, and hostile" speech.'

Sounds like they're making it illegal to do the whole 'shouting fire in movie theature' online.

 

[hongkongfooey]

seriously?
What would this bill do that is not already illegal to do?
The last i heard there were laws against harassment.
It just seems to me another way for the criminals running our government right now to take more rights away, justify their paychecks, and control people.
I have a novel ideal, why don't we try to enforce the laws we already have before we go trying to make new ones that require stealing more money from us in taxes to hire more yes men that sit around and do nothing more then try to figure out more ways to steal our money, rights and freedom.

right on!

 

[hongkongfooey]

When did America trade in it's testicles for a purse? More feel good nonsense that will be abused by the overly sensitive as a way to get even with people that they disagree with.

 

[Thesemindz]

Vote Democrat. Freedom is a terrible thing, and it must be stopped in our lifetime.

Don't worry.

It will be.


-Rob

 

[Thesemindz]

Here's my problem.



Is repeated demands that Senator X step down for incompetence going to cause X "emotional distress" and be deemed "hostile"? Will the demander be charged then? See, I can see the morons we have in power going to that extent, to silence opponents. The Justice Dept. has already been turned over to the RIAA, so will they then use this as a legal hammer to silence RIAA critics? Will 3rd party's be browbeaten into the ground for daring to upset the Secretary of whatever? These are legitconcerns as our government has proven over and over again that it has no problems squashing dissent when they can get away with it.

In my blog, I openly and repeatedly and emphatically called the actions of our government employees evil, because I honestly believe them to be.

Wouldn't that be deemed hostile? What about the hostility of inflating our currency into oblivion and engaging in a violent war against ideas they disagree with? I see that as pretty hostile, but they aren't going to outlaw it.

This is just another example of rights being privelidged to the crown. They can say and do whatever "hostile" thing they wish, if we call them on it, it could be a felony.


-Rob