Lawmaker pushes to kill Internet anonymity

[Geee]

Daily Caller:

Pseudonymous and anonymous comments have long been a critical part of U.S. public discourse, though, and the bill may be on shaky legal ground.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) noted on its website that the “right to anonymous speech is also protected well beyond the printed page.”

“Thus in 2002 the Supreme Court struck down a law requiring proselytizers to register their true names with the mayor’s office before going door-to-door,” wrote EFF, noting that the Supreme Court protects Internet commentary as it does pamphleteering.

The bill is part of a larger trend of lawmakers seeking to censor anonymous online speech

[Pepper]

@Geee

 

 

See

http://www.bricklin.com/pamphleteers.htm

and a comment near end from

 

From Professor Chris Daly:

One other feature of 18th C. pamphleteering deserves mention, one that may have a lot of relevance in other countries today where the Web is used for purposes of political insurrection. That is, the pamphlet was preferred by the rebels because it did not provide any target for retaliation by the crown. It was a guerilla form of publishing in which an individual or small revolutionary group could make a point, then disappear. This was in contrast to the more established printers.

Typically, the printer owned his shop, his press, his tools and all his stock. If he antagonized the Crown, they knew just where to find him, and the king's agents could easily shut him down. The hit-and-run, anonymous pamphleteer, on the other hand, was almost impossible to find and, thus, to stop.

 

 

http://www.jaburgwilk.com/articles/how-to-discover-the-identity-of-an-anonymous-internet-author.aspx

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_post

 

@Valin

FYI

 

[Valin]

@Geee

 

 

See

http://www.bricklin....amphleteers.htm

and a comment near end from

 

From Professor Chris Daly:

One other feature of 18th C. pamphleteering deserves mention, one that may have a lot of relevance in other countries today where the Web is used for purposes of political insurrection. That is, the pamphlet was preferred by the rebels because it did not provide any target for retaliation by the crown. It was a guerilla form of publishing in which an individual or small revolutionary group could make a point, then disappear. This was in contrast to the more established printers.

Typically, the printer owned his shop, his press, his tools and all his stock. If he antagonized the Crown, they knew just where to find him, and the king's agents could easily shut him down. The hit-and-run, anonymous pamphleteer, on the other hand, was almost impossible to find and, thus, to stop.

 

 

http://www.jaburgwil...net-author.aspx

 

http://en.wikipedia..../Anonymous_post

 

 

@Valin

FYI

 

 

 

Blog the XXIst century pamphleteering.