Follow by Email

Sunday, October 10, 2010

California Bans Malicious Online Impersonation

Preview for Sunday 101010,

First a shout out to my Niece. Well, my Niece and Cousin. It is THEIR BIRTHDAY!!! My Niece is 19, my Cousin is 18 this year. Happy Birthday to both.

Hey folks,

Happy Birthday to you as well. If it applies. Happy Sunday to the rest of you. I AM Peter Carlock, your,,,wait! That's right. I'm Peter Carlock. This IS the Big Sunday Edition of the OPNTalk Blog. I say this all the time. I SIGN all my posts here and elsewhere. I ALWAYS have.

Go surfing. Everywhere I post, anytime over the past 18 years or so. I have no idea. For a WHILE. ETP, Hartford Courant out of Conn, Times Harold Record out of NY, to the current Tom Sullivan Radio, Twitter, Facebook, HERE of course. EVERYWHERE I post, participate, Debate, Whatever, there is no doubt who I am. I sign my name, and take full credit for what I say.

Now I know that some do not. I understand people like "Fubar," or "Pink Lady," or "Slaughterhouse," ETC, post as these instead of using their own names for fear of criticism, or somehow, it enables them to be more open in speaking their mind. I get that. I also know that some create FAKE names like "Anna Kay" AKA Karen Hinton.

So I understand that some want to ban this type of behaviour. Yet I'm having a hard time with the GOVERNMENT saying they can not do this. I'm on the fence with this one. According toTechWorld - California bans malicious online impersonation
On Monday California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed the law, which makes it a misdemeanor in the state to impersonate someone online for "purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another person."

The bill's author, State Senator Joe Simitian, said that Senate Bill 1411 brings California's impersonation laws into the 21st century by addressing "the dark side of the social networking revolution."

"Pretending to be someone else online takes no more Web savvy than posting comments on a Web forum under that person's name," said Simitian, in a statement. "When it's done to cause harm, folks need a law on the books they can turn to."
Why do we need another Law on the Books to curb BEHAVIOUR? Now I know this is about Cyber Bullying. But even some Kook Lib Groups out there are against this.
"It could be used to put the lid on free speech," said Mike Bonanno a member of the Yes Men, a group that has made a career out of parodying powerful corporations. "Our impersonations are revealed almost immediately after we do them -- there is a net gain of information for the public: it is anything but fraud. But those facts may not stop corporations and their political cronies from using this law to attack activists who are truly exercising free speech," he wrote in an e-mail.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation doesn't like the law either. Like Bonanno, EFF Senior Staff Attorney Corynne McSherry worries that it could give corporations and public officials a new way to sue their critics into silence. "We're disappointed that the Governor decided to sign this bill, given that it is likely to be used to squelch political speech," she said via e-mail.

The law lets victims seek damages in civil court. Perpetrators can also face criminal charges -- up to a US$1,000 fine and a year's imprisonment. The law takes effect Jan. 1, 2011.
So is this really an attack on Free Speech? Or is it something that is a good thing, forcing people to take full credit for what they post? I'm not sure. Like I said, I'm on the fence with this one. YET, it is more Government dictating how we operate in our Daily Lives. That is nearly ALWAYS bad.

Coming right up today?

Food Police New Target, Soda
Leftist Judge Rules Obama Gov can force US Citizens to buy its products
Boehner Speech on Jobs & the Economy
IWA For Sunday 101010

All that coming right up. Remember the Email is as always, As always, feel free to Email me Articles, Comments, personal stuff, whatever. As I say, you never know what you may see here.

Going to fill my cup, be right back.

No comments: