Anti-Troll or Censorship? AZ Law Would Criminalize Harsh Words on the Web
- Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:06am by
Liz Klimas
- Print »
- Email »
Internet trolls were discussed in 2006 at Wikipedia's Wikimania. With the continual rise in cyberbullying, legislators, like those in Arizona, are seeking to put a stop to some offensive speech on the Internet.
An Arizona bill has passed in state legislature to make online bullying and some other speech an illegal and punishable offense, but it has opponents saying if made into law it would set a precedent that would lead to online censorship.
(Related: This is what happened when the BBC confronted a ‘brutal, bigoted’ Facebook troll)
A local ABC News affiliate reports that the bill has not yet made it to the governor’s desk for a signature as it is “likely being reworked due to a public outcry.” Watch ABC 15′s report:
Arizona House Bill 2549 states:
“It is unlawful for any person, with intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend, to use a any 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.” [Emphasis added]
If it were to become law, violators could be charged with a Class 1 misdemeanor. The punishment becomes more weighty — a Class 3 felony — if any sort of stalking is involved. Gizmodo explains these punishments could mean up to six months in jail and a $250,000 fine (Class 1 misdemeanor), or a minimum of 2.5 years up to 25 years in jail (Class 3 felony).
The Phoenix Business Journal reports the bill is meant to update anti-stalking laws as they are related to telephone calls and to include the digital world.
Gizmodo, a tech blog frequently known as an advocate for free Internet, is against this law, which it calls an attack on one of the Internet’s basic tenants. It says it is a “dangerous” bill created by “legislators who fundamentally don’t understand the nature of the Internet”:
Opponents of the bill argue that the wording is overly broad and could easily be interpreted to include not just one-on-one communications but public forums like 4Chan, Reddit, and anywhere else that allows commenting. You thought the banhammer was bad? Try handcuffs.
It could also have a chilling effect on free speech by prohibiting shocking or “profane” language online. And since the bill stipulates that the offense only has to occur on Arizona soil (since a Facebook comment is definitely a geographic place, right?) that basically puts the entire Internet on notice.
ABC News 15 reports that while some have likened it to Internet censorship in China or Syria, Arizona House Minority Leader Chad Campbell says it isn’t an issue of censorship but increasing protection online against stalkers:
“This was not an attack on any First Amendment rights,” said Campbell while standing in the shadows of the state capitol. “I enjoy my First Amendment rights, just as you, this is not something we want and if it needs to be reworked a bit to ease concerns, we will do that.”
Campbell said he had fielded questions and calls from concerned people over the issue.
“You‘ve seen some of the bullying problems we’ve had in high schools and grade schools across the country, Facebook posts attacking people, Twitter messages attacking people, we’re trying to update the stalking code to reflect the modern day,” said Campbell.
The bill’s opponents are both large and small. MSNBC reports Media Coalition – a First Amendment rights group that represents the Motion Picture Association of America, the Recording Industry Association of America, the Association of American Publishers, among others — is one of the more major groups against the bill. It wrote in a letter to the Gov. Jan Brewer:
… 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.
There is fear over where the line could be drawn for offensive words, such as satirical cartoons and political, economic or other cultural criticism.
Update: Karen Winfield, assistant to state Sen. Sylvia Allen, contacted the Blaze on Tuesday to provide some further clarification on the proposed changes to the existing law. Winfield wrote in an email that much of the proposed law is nothing new. Some of the changes simply include changing the word “telephone” to “any electronic or digital device.” She wrote that the phrase ”with intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend” is a qualifier to the illegal act. She explained that using a phone in combination with obscenities or to make a threat would be considered an illegal act under the proposed changes. Winfield acknowledges that sometimes families and friends use obscene language or make threats over the phone, but it isn’t illegal. She wrote:
Sometimes people do make threats over the phone or Internet with friends or family, as in, “I will break your neck if you aren’t home by 10 p.m.” Is that illegal? No. Why? Because of the qualifier — “with the intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend.” The qualifier is the lynchpin that narrows down what is illegal to the actions of stalkers and harrassers.
Winfield emphasizes that it is the intent that matters with this law. For example, if someone called 50 times per day in the middle of the night and made threats, then it would be considered illegal with the proposed law because the intent behind the communication.
With these clarifications, Winfield wrote, “It’s actually a pretty tame bill that simply updates our stalker/harassment laws to bring them in line with modern technology. That’s why it got a unanimous vote in the Senate.”
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 683 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 647 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 523 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 361 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 314 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 172 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 210 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 146 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Scathing New Ad Capitalizes on Rep. Ryan‘s ’Fading Obama Posters’ Remark 124 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 172 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (126)
deeberj
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:54amAlmost everyone who posts at blogs and places like this will break that stupid law. Annoy and offend? Since when is it against the law to annoy and offend. This is ridiculous.
Report Post »imsteph
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 12:15pmCENSORSHIP-
the road to Hell is paved with good intentions…
how about if parents do their job and instruct their children.
teach them that they have boundaries.
that their worth comes from God/family. (not how many ‘friends’ they have on facebook)
that the world (mankind as a unit) is a cold, harsh, dangerous place.
that while they love them-it is no one else‘s ’job’ to do so===and if you do your life right-MANY people will hate you!
not being a sheep is a badge of honor.
be prepared for the ‘herd’ to go against you, verbally abuse you, and to push you away.
when free discourse is nullified-evil prevails.
Report Post »booger71
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 12:25pmNo local, state or federal law can trump the 1st Amendment.
Report Post »USAMEDIC3008
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 12:36pmHere we go again
Report Post »these *********** PO* CAN all go to **** >
936988 $#!* ******* 0$98&& %#*** ***** …
KickinBack
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 12:38pmThe bill is only limited to Trolls. It doesn’t mention anything about:
Ettins, Cyclopses, Wyverns, Wraiths, or Rose-Ellens…
Report Post »BSdetector
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 12:54pmUNCONSTITUTIONAL. Does this need to go to the Supreme Court too?
Report Post »Roaran
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 1:28pmFor those thinking this law is unconstitutional, first amendment only limits the federal government from making such laws that prohibit speech, religion etc…
State laws are fully capable of doing so, this is why gun laws at the state level are constitutionally permissible.
Not a jab, but understanding the Constitution before claiming something is Constitutional helps us all out.
Report Post »blackyb
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 1:41pmThere is not enough jails. If those people have nothing better do do, that one at the board could go shave. Also if they don’t like what they hear, turn it off or go to the disney channel. I can see if people are getting harrassing e-mails and causing trauma and damage or from posting photos and lies about someone where it can be damaging. But to monitor blogs, where people get silly, etc., no. Draw the line when it comes to private conversations, etc.
Report Post »We need some conservatives to teach our law students the U.S. Constitution and real Federal Law and Spirit of the Law in Truth. This bunch of liberals are twisting the laws to where it is confusing to others who are just learning the laws. They are trying to doctor laws where they can be used on a whim agains those who point out things that are being hidden from the public. Factual things. This is another attack, or could be used as one on free speech. People so need more courtesy when dealing with others, but these infidels are not the courtesy police. This is where families should teach their children, not the government.
Leopold
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 2:40pmIn a perfect society you do not need FREE SPEECH.
Everybody knows exactly what, when and how to say some things.
FREE SPEECH ONLY HAS MEANING when every word that is harsh, rude, yes, even threatening to some, especially political speech, can be voiced.
And it is political speech that is the real target.
After all, these laws are made by politicians.
To make speech free something that it was never ment to be, takes the meaning of free speech and it loses it’s power
Report Post »ChiefGeorge
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 3:19pmThe Left finds my very existence hard to stomach and thats offensive to them. We are on the fast track to tyranny in this country! Pretty soon it will be law of the land. Free exchange of ideas will be lost forever. Lets just bubble wrap everyones minds for this new world order/utopia. Nothing bad can get in and absolutely nothing bad can get out.
Report Post »hidden_lion
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 3:29pmRoaran-
Report Post »Your constitutional rights can not be violated by the state or the federal government, the supreme court ruled on it against the gun bans in Chicago and DC. No government local or federal can take away what God has given.
Brooke Lorren
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 6:13pmSo… pretty much if I tell someone that if you don‘t repent of your sins and accept Jesus Christ as your savior that you’re going to hell, then I’m breaking the law? I guess I’ll be a lawbreaker then. I’ll be in good company though… just about all the disciples got in trouble with the law for the same thing.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 7:48pmAnd… it’s UnConstitutional!
Report Post »black9897
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 8:53pmMore laws to control what we say! What’s next, can’t think bad thoughts?
Report Post »The Gooch
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 9:46pmhidden_lion,
Report Post »You are correct. States can further define, but not take away rights. Just as this site can choose to mediate posts. You can say whatever damn fool thing you want (with the classic caveats in place); that doesn’t mean private citizens or corporations have to give you a forum. One can always take his or her brand of crazy elsewhere.
I have no problem with sites restricting or banning posts/posters. I may laugh and say it’s stupid and childish, but if it’s your sanbox, it’s your rules. Making poor etiquette criminal? That’s just too limp-wristed and cowardly to even take seriously.
To all the wilting violets and busybodies: Screw your feelings. And in that same token, screw my feelings. Life should not be ruled by feelings. That puts emotional tripmines and masters of the “Gotchya!” Game in charge. It is nothing less than a twisted, new age totalitarianism.
VicksVaporub
Posted on April 4, 2012 at 12:03amwaiting for moderation LOL
Report Post »LookTowardsTheLight
Posted on April 4, 2012 at 10:28am@KickinBack
Not to mention @JZC and @TOWER7_FEMACAMP
Report Post »RamonPreston
Posted on April 11, 2012 at 11:02pmControl. It’s all about control..Watch your freedoms slip away.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:51amThis is dangerous censorship across the board; I pray our governor has enough common sense to veto this bill across the board.
Report Post »momrules
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 12:08pmJan Brewer is a very smart lady. Surely she won’t fall for this, at least I hope not.
Report Post »mkw22
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 1:43pmI agree, certainly she is not even considering signing this. This is beyond absurd. I could offend someone by saying I am a Republican (and proud of it). No more calling democrats dummycrats.
Report Post »I mean really, where’s the fun going to be?!
christos
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:49am…More censorship attempts under the guise of _SAFETY–and it’s–THE RIGHT THING TO DO_ Intrusive,Communist PC Thugs,,,Turning back to what made this Country great +JESUS+GOD+ Small Limited Government is the Key—Dissolve the Fed/Illuminati,
Report Post »christos
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 12:01pm…More speech not less speech…Commies.
Report Post »SquidVetOhio
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:49amI’m not a troll. I have internet turrets. YOU ALL ARE &@$*& COMMIES. Sorry……. another fit.
Report Post »gbfreak
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:49amI can’t believe that AZ would even entertain this bill. Killthebill NOW!
Report Post »sawbuck
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:48amHuh…Online-Harassing- Activity… can make you into a felon..?
Report Post »I would be worried about someone peeking in my window or
trespassing on my property..You know… “in the flesh” ..What do they get..?
SquidVetOhio
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:48amI would hope Jan Brewer would veto this.
Report Post »Obama Snake Oil Co
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:47amI deal with libterdial trolls all day. I find they cannot defend themselves but rather, place vile, spun and missinformation. Its what they always do when you have no ability to post reasonable well researched dialogue. I would defend their ability to troll even if they have nothing to really post. Face it, how do you defend the worst president in the history of this nation since Jimmy Carter? You see their dilema….
Report Post »Locked
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:46amArizona seems to come up with a lot of oddball laws. This one will likely never see the light of day, at least.
Report Post »sWampy
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:45amWe look and act more and more like a sub 3rd world nation every day.
Report Post »justangry
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:29amGee, I can’t even type the scientific name for humans on this site without getting ********* Seems the Blaze is fine with censorship. Unless someone else is doing it.
Report Post »The_Almighty_Creestof
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:38amIt is the hypocrites on the site reporting your posts.
Report Post »B2H
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:28amI have been deeply disappointed in my state lawmakers this year. First the Birther bill, then the Birth Control bill, now this! I’m not sure if this is just my Libertarian split from the Republicans but I would have expected this bill to be coming from California, not Arizona!
Report Post »johnjamison
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:40amThere’s nothing wrong with asking someone who wants to be trusted with serving the public complete disclosure including a birth certificate.You have to provide that just to get a passport. There’s is also nothing wrong with require those who wish to engage in sexual activities to furnish their own contarception. We don’t supply skate boarders,bikers,or sky divers with helmets or other protective gear.
Report Post »There is however somnething wrong with limiting speech….It’s Uncontitutional.
Slapstiq
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 2:09pmAsk yourself why so much in Arizona? Just think, congresswoman shot, Sherif Arpio stating he has clear evidence of fraudlent id papers, Immigration law, now censoring the dissention. Really hard to convince me that its just all coincidence.
Report Post »The_Almighty_Creestof
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:26amThe cowards hiding behind their monitors will have to find a new medium to target with their childish angst.
Report Post »COFemale
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:24amLook at the bright side, we can shut Atheist up, because they meet all that criteria in the bill.
All kidding aside, this is a crappy bill. I WILL NOT COMPLY. You don’t like my language, so be it, either don’t respond to my post, ignore me, or call me a name; it won’t hurt my feelings.
We already have a cyber-bullying law don’t we?
Report Post »I.Gaspar
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:24amYeah, let your government “protect” you even more.
Report Post »Welcome to the Brave New World, 1984, and the bottom rung of hell, all wrapped into one package, courtesy of the progressive movent.
KickinBack
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:24amI love our trolls on the Blaze. They may be idiotic at times, but at least they stay on topic…
…As for random, idiotic, off-the-wall, fire and brimstone comments (say, from a certain user with the green lightsabre…) I might take an exception…
Report Post »PaxInVeritate
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 3:01pmGreen light saber? I thought that was a picture of radioactive split pea soup spewing from his mouth, and always expect him to quote…
Report Post »“You really don’t want me to play, huh?”
“No, I do. Captain Howdy said no.”
Liberty1791
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:24am******* Blaze censors —that was funny
Report Post »marine249
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:27amthe Blaze can censor speech
Report Post »the goverment cannot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
banjarmon
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:23amAnd I though the people in AZ were smarter than this!!
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:43amWhy? How many times have they elected McCain now?
Report Post »Osaka
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:21amI agree that bullying should stop, but censoring freedom of speech is not the way to do it. Education, not legislation. Come on AZ, you understand some freedoms so well! Freedom of speech means freedom to say good as well as bad.
Report Post »Captain Crunch
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:20amBad law. Unnecessary law. We already have plenty of laws to protect people and punish the evildoers. If you were to harass me or give me a difficult time here on the Blaze there is no way you should face a huge fine or jail. The people here at the Blaze are usually pretty responsive to reports of inappropriate posts…and the complaints about censorship are evidence of their actions.
Report Post »Itsjusttim
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:19amYou, you know who I’m talking about, ask yourself what God is going to do to you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8k7l9UDxz8
Report Post »The_Almighty_Creestof
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:40amGod? He‘s going to buy a round of beer and we’ll while away the night playing “You remember when you did that crazy thing…”
Report Post »Itsjusttim
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 12:09pmGood thing the night is short so I wouldn’t have to hear that long, ah the morning twilight.
Report Post »BuggiOlleo
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:16amI think that this is the pooping point… Proposed Law only, but can it pass? it is good to know that Government can’t find a way to Tax the Net but is potentially Fine the Net..Wow, the imlication here is amazing–tinkering always backfires–pass law to STOP speech–unless your followers are affected..hmmm, might want to rethink this Laws..Moderators will be joining the unemployment line..Gracios! mui mucho .gov!
Report Post »Slapstiq
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 2:11pmThe law did pass, just needs governor signing.
Report Post »SpankDaMonkey
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:12am.
Report Post »You just can’t say anything any more…………….
txwheels
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:22amThat’s a fact. I posted a reply to MARINE25 earlier. My reply had only fact in it and THEBLAZE deleted it.
So much for this site and free speech!
Report Post »COFemale
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:29amSometimes post take awhile to post. Check back after a few minutes, you just might find it. Also, with so many posting, it is possible some get lost in cyber space. Don’t take it personally TX
Report Post »Locked
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:46amFrom being on here for quite a while, it seems there are several words that when put in a post will automatically delete the post before it goes up.
I find that often when people complain that they only had “fact” in their posts, they contain some of these words. If a post goes up and is later deleted, odds are there was a deliberate effort to bypass the word filter (which is different than the post filter) and someone reported them. Purposely bypassing a word filter by using numbers instead of letters, or only censoring one letter, still breaks the rules and can get the post deleted if someone reports it.
Report Post »martinez012577
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:10amThat is dumb. Losing freedoms for our “own good” is getting old. When will the real American people wake up and see what is happening.
Voting for freedom, voting Ron Paul 2012.
Report Post »drattastic
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:10amYou people in AZ better get on the phones to your POLLiticians and start bending their ears and signing petitions ASAP.
Report Post »CatB
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:22amSticks and stones – didn’t these people ever hear that? …we the people can handle the trolls … no need for censorship. If someone crosses the line and makes threats .. we already have laws for that. We don’t need LESS free speech .. we need MORE …
Report Post »momrules
Posted on April 3, 2012 at 11:55amWell said CATB.
Report Post »