Bizarre Anti-”Cyber Stalking” Law
By Ian Scott
A new US law defines “cyber-stalking” so broadly as to include anything that may be posted anonymously on the Internet that is “annoying” to someone.
First, let’s look at the term “cyber-stalking.” While making my own rounds of various blogs, I’ve come across this term used to describe people who might post comments frequently on a particular blog, or in relation to a particular blogger. What has happened is that the term “stalking” which has meant real stalking, personal and up close stalking has now been misappropriated by those who simply don’t like the fact that someone sitting in front of a monitor and keyboard will post messages that the misappropriator of the term doesn’t like.
In reality, this is simply bizarre to say you have been “cyber-stalked” because someone has annoyed you. And most certainly, it lessens considerably cases of real stalking.
Notwithstanding the above, that it truly is an insane idea to come up with a fantasy about being “stalked” on line simply because someone writes things that annoy you, the President of the United States, by signing this into law, is utterly ignoring the Constitution he swore to uphold, namely the Right to Freedom Of Expression.
The right to freedom of expression does not have limits as far as whether or not you are “annoying” someone. There could be an argument made for libelling someone, or willingly causing someone damages that are uwarranted, and perhaps even limiting that expression if a higher “right” such as the right to property is being contravened. For example, a person may have the right to express themselves, but that does not imply the right to demand that others listen. This does limit your freedom of expression as far as forcing others to listen to your sounds, but as far as writing, no one is forced to read what you have written.
If you are not forced to read what someone else has written, how indeed can it be “annoying” just because you voluntarily decided to read what “annoyed” you? Only irresponsible people, who have little control over how they choose to spend their time, could ever suggest that they had no choice but to read something they had a good idea beforehand, that it would annoy them. And even if they had no idea they would be “annoyed,” do feelings of “annoyance” now have greater meaning then the right to expression?
According to News.com, the wording of the portion of the new law in question is:
“”Whoever…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… without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person…who receives the communications…shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”
How does anyone prove “intent?” I believe that I’ve “annoyed” some folks with my own communications on the Internet, but my intent was to discover truth in spite of silly ideas that someone had proposed. And isn’t it even more ridiculous that if you are not anonymous, it’s ok to annoy? And how to prove an intent to be “anonymous” as well? If I use a “handle” on the Internet, yet many know my real identity, but someone who does not is “annoyed” by what I have written, am I then possibly breaching this silly law?
And what if the person who anonymously “annoys” another person claims that in fact, the person bringing suit first annoyed them, and they believed the only way to be able to counter the annoyance was to be anonymous?
The Founding Fathers of the United States of America, some of whom wrote anonymous tracts that annoyed the principalities of the time, would be rolling in their graves if they could know of this new law.
Finally, this new idea of “cyber-stalking” utterly lessens the true meaning of “stalking,” and is used by those who would want to stifle debate or opposing opinions to their own. As well, this law poses enormous problems for any expectation of privacy on the Internet. This law would have the effect of reducing any ability you might have to post on any topic, anonymously.
Read more in: Privacy |