Arizona legislation will make cyberbullies, Internet trolls criminals

Rick

Posts: 4,512   +66
Staff

Upon the Arizona governor's desk sits a revised house bill (pdf) which is ready to be signed into law. The changes in H.B 2549s aim to curb and even criminalize cyberbullying, however, it may also make nearly every chat room and comment section found on the Internet a place of illicit behavior. 

The amendments made to H.B. 2549 would make just about any annoying, harassing or offensive online comment, reply or message illegal in the state of Arizona. In other words, the time-honored vocation of Internet trolling would become a criminal offense -- a class 1 misdemeanor -- punishable by up to a $250,000 fine and 6 months in jail. 

According to The Verge, Media Coalition and other sources, what Arizona officials have done is take a telecommunications bill which was already law, cross out all references to "telephone" and replace them with "electronic or digital communications". On its face, this could be seen as a sensible thing to do considering the Internet is, at its core, a communications device. However, because people voluntarily seek out places on the Internet -- the web doesn't ring your phone until you're forced to turn it off, like a harassing phone call might -- some would argue it's quite different.

For example:

A. It is unlawful for any person, with intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend, to use a telephone [read: electronic or digital device] and use any obscene, lewd or profane language or suggest any lewd or lascivious act, or threaten to inflict physical harm to the person or property of any person. 

Source: azleg.gov

Realizing the potential dangers of such legislation, the Media Coalition has sent a formal request (pdf) to Arizona's governor, Jan Brewer, in hopes she will veto the bill. In the letter, the organization seems to capture the essence of the issue within a couple of paragraphs.

H.B. 2549 would make it a crime to use any electronic or digital device to communicate using obscene, lewd or profane language or to suggest a lewd or lascivious act if done with intent to "annoy," "offend," "harass" or "terrify."  The legislation offers no definitions for "annoy," "offend," "harass" or "terrify."   "Electronic or digital device" is defined only as any wired or wireless communication device and multimedia storage device.  "Lewd" and "profane" are not defined in the statute or by reference.  "Lewd" is generally understood to mean lusty or sexual in nature and "profane" is generally defined as disrespectful or irreverent about religion or religious practices.

Government may criminalize speech that rises to the level of harassment and many states have laws that do so, but this legislation takes a law meant to address irritating phone calls and applies it to communication on web sites, blogs, listserves and other Internet communication. H.B. 2549 is not limited to a one to one conversation between two specific people.  The communication does not need to be repetitive or even unwanted.  There is no requirement that the recipient or subject of the speech actually feel offended, annoyed or scared.  Nor does the legislation make clear that the communication must be intended to offend or annoy the reader, the subject or even any specific person.

Permalink to story.

 
Wow, with the kind of comments found on techspot, they may as well make this website illigal already!
 
I see a blow to freedom of speach on this one. Some ppl can neither take a joke nor respond politely to online posts. This doesnt mean that they need 6 months in jail and a $250.000 fine. It just means their prudes thats all. Freedom of Speach is kinda nessasary for the internet to exist. If this bill goes throgh I see a Federal injunction against it happening almost immediatly since its general wording goes against the constitution.
 
This is ridiculous. There go multiplayer online games cause there is so much trash talking there.
 
The group "The Eagles" had a song about 20 years ago that sums it up...
GET OVER IT.
People just need to grow a pair and not be "so sensitive", but considering the helicopter
nature that parents treat kids, it's not surprising.
 
While bill leaves things way to vague and open to abuse I feel its a step in the right direction.

I for one am sick and tired of youtube comments that go along the lines of "why don't you go suck a *****" etc.
Trolls like that deserve punishment.
 
lipe123 said:
While bill leaves things way to vague and open to abuse I feel its a step in the right direction.

I for one am sick and tired of youtube comments that go along the lines of "why don't you go suck a *****" etc.
Trolls like that deserve punishment.

You should also go to jail now after that comment...
 
This is good news that means no more Apple marketing campaign & fanboy trolls that spam the web everywhere you look at on comments sections whether you are on tech sites, Youtube, Facebook or Twitter there's all just a big bullshit Apple marketing campaign driven by Apple's marketing team and brainless fanboy zombies.

Finally "Law meets stupids". lol
 
Is it time for us to bring out our Guy Faulkes masks and march yet? Totalitarian control is coming guys!
 
Since our governor took office when janet joined the obama squad, she has done all sorts of none sense to get attention. The immigration bill, blocked medical mariuana that we voted in, tried to make arizona the first voting state, yelled at the president when he came here, now this I bet she votes it in just for the LuL(attention)
 
I find any reference to demolition man entertaining...maybe you deserve a reward for entertaining comments and punishment for annoying ones?

On the other hand how do you judge annoying? If somebody quoted a country music song I would probably be annoyed and might wish they were in jail but that doesn't mean they deserve it... It all seems kind of absurd. And who the hell is gonna police the Internet looking for trolls or annoying comments? I'm certainly not paying for people to do that.
 
@Ranger

Now we all know that in order for them to afford to do any internet policing they will have to raise your taxes. I wonder if the Line item description will have something to the effect of: Trolls=$20.00
 
They should make it illegal, but only punishable via a fine of at most 100$, for minors. It'd curb some of the attitudes of minors plus get some money into the government. If Xbox LIVE is any indication of poor character in minors, that could really help this country crawl out of this hole we've dug. It'd be massively controversial, but with minors what rights to they actually have at that point in their lives. Most haven't even had a government class if public education is any indication.
 
Good luck with that, while I personally dislike trolls and so called cyber-bullies, but to enact such a law would directly conflict with the first amendment. You may not like what someone says, and it may even be a flat out lie or annoying, but it is their RIGHT to say it if they choose to do so.
 
Internet decency laws are solutions looking for problems and a gross violation of Freedom of Speech. These statutes have absolutely NO affect on cyber-bullying and only serve to be a lightning-rod for the ACLU and other watchdog groups, wasting taxpayers’ time and money to no avail. A similar law was passed just last summer here in Tennessee, which I responded to with a “potentially offensive” portrait of our Governor Bill Haslam and his First Lady to bring attention to the issue on my artist’s blog at http://dregstudiosart.blogspot.com/2011/07/potentially-offensive-portrait-governor.html To date, not a single charge has been filed enforcing this frivolous and dangerous law including myself.
 
I'm wondering if "person" is defined to include any corporation? If so, this seems to be legislation that would essentially eliminate any criticism of companies or their products.
 
There's a law against illegal copying and file sharing, but it doesn't stop people. This won't make any difference for most people - but it should allow the Police to go after systematic bullying that leads to self-harm. Facebook is likely to feel this law more than comments on news sites. Let's see how Mr Zuckerberg handles this - should be entertaining.
 
well if it's someone bashing on the same person again and again, I think he deserves a sentence. but if it's just an angry kid in a video game...
 
lipe123 said:
While bill leaves things way to vague and open to abuse I feel its a step in the right direction.

I for one am sick and tired of youtube comments that go along the lines of "why don't you go suck a *****" etc.
Trolls like that deserve punishment.
SumthinSacred said:
They should make it illegal, but only punishable via a fine of at most 100$, for minors. It'd curb some of the attitudes of minors plus get some money into the government. If Xbox LIVE is any indication of poor character in minors, that could really help this country crawl out of this hole we've dug. It'd be massively controversial, but with minors what rights to they actually have at that point in their lives. Most haven't even had a government class if public education is any indication.
Mindwraith said:
I support this entirely. It's illegal to harass people in real life, it should be illegal online too.
Ladies/Gentlemen, the web by it's very nature may offend your delicate sensibilities - pull the plug now before something awfully horrid happens...

What ever happened to "sticks and stones..."? So someone insults you on the web... so what? Why does someone calling someone else a name need to involve wasting taxpayers' money and lining the pockets of lawyers?

Ok let's say you're being targeted by some loser with far too much time on their hand at a certain site - probably a social networking site - so report this to the sites owners/admins...

So let's suppose your kid is on faecebook and getting insulted/trolled/stalked/"cyber bullied"/whatever... revelation: Your kid /should not/ be on faecebook. Take some responsibility instead of expecting the state to intervene for you. Block your kid from visiting that site - ban the IP address/domain, or maybe ban them from using the web without supervision...?

If all else fails consider the following: It was /you/ who took the decision to publish your real identity on a pathetic "social networking" site visible to every other web user. Don't trust big corporations - trust common sense, i.e. keep your real identity and especially your children's real identities /off/ these sites.

:rolleyes:
 
Guest said:

What ever happened to "sticks and stones..."? So someone insults you on the web... so what? Why does someone calling someone else a name need to involve wasting taxpayers' money and lining the pockets of lawyers?

Ok let's say you're being targeted by some loser with far too much time on their hand at a certain site - probably a social networking site - so report this to the sites owners/admins...

So let's suppose your kid is on faecebook and getting insulted/trolled/stalked/"cyber bullied"/whatever... revelation: Your kid /should not/ be on faecebook. Take some responsibility instead of expecting the state to intervene for you. Block your kid from visiting that site - ban the IP address/domain, or maybe ban them from using the web without supervision...?

If all else fails consider the following: It was /you/ who took the decision to publish your real identity on a pathetic "social networking" site visible to every other web user. Don't trust big corporations - trust common sense, i.e. keep your real identity and especially your children's real identities /off/ these sites.

:rolleyes:

The problem with your comment is that such a logical sequence of reasoning only works in a society full of sensible adults. That species, however, is dying out and is being being rapid replaced by an adolescent-adult hybrid (body of a grown up, mind of a child). Parents regulating their children, kids being EXPECTED to /ignore/ pests & stand up to bullies, it's not acceptable anymore.
 
Back