Mar 11 2008
Kentucky Legislator Opposes Free And Confidential Speech
Just because some idiots in this guy’s region of the country can’t act maturely a Kentucky legislator is going to end free speech by demanding web sites post people’s real, full names (like I have a clue what someone’s name is??):
If the bill becomes law, the website operator would have to pay if someone was allowed to post anonymously on their site. The fine would be five-hundred dollars for a first offense and one-thousand dollars for each offense after that.
It ain’t my fault of some people cannot control themselves. And I sure as hell have no way of proving or disproving any information used to become a commenter on this site. Basically this kind of law does one thing – shuts down free expression of views. If I was faced with this thing becoming law the first thing I would do is shutdown the ability to comment here – which is rare enough these days on websites.
What a speech Nazi this guy is – and yes he is a Republican.
Maybe Glenn Reynolds has the right idea, no comment section.
I counter propose that a blogger be assigned to hang on this guy;s elbow from the moment he wakes in the morning till he gets into bed at night.
Afterall, he is a public servant, so he should serve .. some purpose.
Who’s this guy think he is – Jay or Silent Bob? For anyone who missed it, at the end of Kevin Smith’s “Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back” the two lead characters come into money and buy plane tickets so that they can jet around the country beating up anyone who criticizes them on the internet, which is mostly a string of 12 year old kids. Don’t you know that this all stems from somebody who criticized HIM on the internet and he’s mad because he doesn’t know who it is.
The funniest line from the article is at the very end:
“Represntative Couch says enforcing this bill if it became law would be a challenge.”
Ya think, Couch? Since this would be a Kentucky law only applicable in Kentucky, how do you think it would have any effect on people outisde your state, i.e. the entire internet???
This idiot doesn’t have the first clue about our constitution – to put it in terms of your situation, AJ, Kentucky has no right or power to tell a Virginia resident what he can 0r cannot do unless he is physically inside the state of Kentucky. If the act in question involves action across state lines (such as the internet, which crosses all lines) then only Federal law can apply and state law is irrelevant.
This to me is the worst thing about his proposal – besides being a bad idea, it’s a powerless ,unenforcable mess. He needs to stick to finding ways to round up stray dogs and stop trying to act like Jay and Silent Bob.
Quote of the Day:
What a speech Nazi this guy is – and yes he is a Republican. ~ AJ Strata
This is all just noise that has no method of being implemented due to the non geographic nature of the net.
The only way this could even be implemented in fact is for every person who has access to the net must present a level one or above digital certificate to log in.
The are verified by a notary public seeing your photo id and sending notarized confirmation to the certificate authority via mail or online to validate the digital certificate for access.
Then as long as the site has it on record linked to a registration or a visit alias names could still be used since the original person is identifiable from the certificate.
But that won’t solve the problem he is trying to deal with, only deter it a little.
Besides most would scream Big Brother, National ID Card stuff to the four winds.
This is the same basic tech that allows digital signing of documents online and also digitally signed emails.