Does this apply to the TFP... - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

stevo · 03-07-2006, 09:02 AM

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2006/Bi...00/1327_I1.HTM

Quote:

ASSEMBLY, No. 1327
STATE OF NEW JERSEY
212th LEGISLATURE

PRE-FILED FOR INTRODUCTION IN THE 2006 SESSION

Sponsored by:
Assemblyman PETER J. BIONDI
District 16 (Morris and Somerset)

SYNOPSIS

Makes certain operators of interactive computer services and Internet service providers liable to persons injured by false or defamatory messages posted on public forum websites.

CURRENT VERSION OF TEXT

As introduced.

An Act concerning the posting of certain Internet messages and supplementing chapter 38A of Title 2A of the New Jersey Statutes.

Be It Enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey:

1. As used in this act:

"Information content provider" means any person or entity that is responsible, in whole or in part, for the creation or development of information provided through the Internet or any other interactive computer service.

"Interactive computer service" means any information system, service, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides service to the Internet.

"Internet" means the international computer network of both federal and non-federal interoperable packet switched data networks.

"Internet service provider" or "provider" means any person, business or organization qualified to do business in this State that provides individuals, corporations, or other entities with the ability to connect to the Internet through equipment that is located in this State.

"Operator" means any person, business or organization qualified to do business in this State that operates an interactive computer service.

2. The operator of any interactive computer service or an Internet service provider shall establish, maintain and enforce a policy to require any information content provider who posts written messages on a public forum website either to be identified by a legal name and address, or to register a legal name and address with the operator of the interactive computer service or the Internet service provider through which the information content provider gains access to the interactive computer service or Internet, as appropriate.

3. An operator of an interactive computer service or an Internet service provider shall establish and maintain reasonable procedures to enable any person to request and obtain disclosure of the legal name and address of an information content provider who posts false or defamatory information about the person on a public forum website.

4. Any person who is damaged by false or defamatory written messages that originate from an information content provider who posts such messages on a public forum website may file suit in Superior Court against an operator or provider that fails to establish, maintain and enforce the policy required pursuant to section 2 of P.L. , c. (C.) (pending before the Legislature as this bill), and may recover compensatory and punitive damages and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee, cost of investigation and litigation from such operator or provider.

5. This act shall take effect on the 90th day following enactment.

STATEMENT

This bill would require an operator of any interactive computer service or an Internet service provider to establish, maintain and enforce a policy requiring an information content provider who posts messages on a public forum website either to be identified by legal name and address or to register a legal name and address with the operator or provider prior to posting messages on a public forum website.

The bill requires an operator of an interactive computer service or an Internet service provider to establish and maintain reasonable procedures to enable any person to request and obtain disclosure of the legal name and address of an information content provider who posts false or defamatory information about the person on a public forum website.

In addition, the bill makes any operator or Internet service provider liable for compensatory and punitive damages as well as costs of a law suit filed by a person damaged by the posting of such messages if the operator or Internet service provider fails to establish, maintain and enforce the policy required by section 2 of the bill.

A) is this a "public" forum? I kind of view it as a private community.
B) answered it myself.
C)Don't you think this goes a little too far?
D)I guess the bills sponsor must have had something bad written on his daughters myspace account.

ubertuber · 03-07-2006, 09:19 AM

I'm no legal or computer genius, but I don't think I'd get worried just yet.

I'd question the jurisdiction aspect - I'm pretty sure the TFP server is not in NJ. At times it hasn't even been in the US.

One way you can tell it goes too far is that it is virtually unenforceable. I don't know how we'd ever verify that people were giving us correct addresses while falling under the label "reasonable measures". After all, we've got 58,000 registered users, and I'm pretty certain some of you guys move from time to time...

The other thing is that this is aimed at "defamatory content" while not specifying who decides what this means. Is something defamatory because I feel defamed? Or are we hinging on court decisions here, which is a little ridiculous because how are you going to go to court before you know the defaming party's identity? A little of a chicken and egg problem there. At any rate, libel/slander/defamation suits are surprisingly hard to win in court...

Bill O'Rights · 03-07-2006, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevo

I guess the bills sponsor must have had something bad written on his daughters myspace account.

I suspect that you may be right.

But, y'know...I think that you (collective you, btw) would have a hell of a time making a case for "damage". Hurt feelings, maybe...but damage? I really don't think so.

xepherys · 03-07-2006, 09:37 AM

Yeah, this seems a bit out there. I'd suggest writing to your own state senator about how you do not approve of such legistlation in the future in your locale. Pre-emptively act against it!

rockogre · 03-07-2006, 07:31 PM

I don't see how it can apply to us. No specific universe or spiritual plane is defined. No specific planet is mentioned. It does, however, provide yet another opportunity to add to my ever growing list of alternate identities.

shakran · 03-07-2006, 08:03 PM

This law will be thrown out on its first challenge. I wouldn't lose too much sleep over it. It's a blatant attempt to squash free speech.

03-07-2006, 09:19 AM	#2 (permalink)
ubertuber spudly Location: Ellay	I'm no legal or computer genius, but I don't think I'd get worried just yet. I'd question the jurisdiction aspect - I'm pretty sure the TFP server is not in NJ. At times it hasn't even been in the US. One way you can tell it goes too far is that it is virtually unenforceable. I don't know how we'd ever verify that people were giving us correct addresses while falling under the label "reasonable measures". After all, we've got 58,000 registered users, and I'm pretty certain some of you guys move from time to time... The other thing is that this is aimed at "defamatory content" while not specifying who decides what this means. Is something defamatory because I feel defamed? Or are we hinging on court decisions here, which is a little ridiculous because how are you going to go to court before you know the defaming party's identity? A little of a chicken and egg problem there. At any rate, libel/slander/defamation suits are surprisingly hard to win in court... __________________ Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

03-07-2006, 07:31 PM	#5 (permalink)
rockogre I aim to misbehave! Location: SW Oklahoma	I don't see how it can apply to us. No specific universe or spiritual plane is defined. No specific planet is mentioned. It does, however, provide yet another opportunity to add to my ever growing list of alternate identities. __________________ Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American G. I. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom

03-07-2006, 09:37 AM	#4 (permalink)
xepherys <3 TFP Location: 17TLH2445607250	Yeah, this seems a bit out there. I'd suggest writing to your own state senator about how you do not approve of such legistlation in the future in your locale. Pre-emptively act against it!

03-07-2006, 08:03 PM	#6 (permalink)
shakran Tone.	This law will be thrown out on its first challenge. I wouldn't lose too much sleep over it. It's a blatant attempt to squash free speech.