Posted on 03/03/2006 3:01:35 PM PST by Calpernia
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.
Thanks for finding this!
ping
Good luck with this. I'm sure that all the web operators on the Isle of Man, or Tuvalu will be complying Real Soon Now. Not to mention the Supreme Court will naturally be on board with every state and territory establishing its own telecommunication policy.
This could kill or, in the very least, badly damage FR.
If you were operating a web site from servers in Upper Volta, would you really try to implement what New Jersey wants? Personally, I'd be saying, "screw you guys, filter my site out from your state if you don't want your citizens seeing it."
It's a pre-filed bill. That's a long, long way from being enacted into NJ law. If anyone in the NJ Legislature is remotely serious about this, someone will file a companion Senate Bill with identical wording. If not, don't even worry about it.
>>>someone will file a companion Senate Bill with identical wording
What does that mean? Do you mean to block this?
This bill would hinder free speech which is what the net is all about. I have been on forums where I have angered some so bad that they resorted to posting vulgar unimaginable lies to try to discredit me. If this law were in affect and my identity made known, there is no doubt in my mind I could have been stalked or worse by the angered party. And if that were to happen, who am I going after for leading a deranged person to me? I see no way this law will pass.
I absolutely agree with you.
But this is NJ and this legislature is for state law.
I honestly have no doubt in my mind it will be signed.
There is a large percentage of citizens of this state that have no idea what has been signed into law the last 16 months or so.
Our state is behind the iron curtain.
It might be worthwhile checking to see if a similar bill was introduced in the last 2 year legislative session. If it was, chances are good this one is going nowhere as well.
Also, to give you some perspective, there are about 12,000 bills prefiled for each legislative session in New Jersey, Only about 100 of those become law, each year. Most of them are PURE political posturing.
There have been schools making their own terms of no Net access. I think that is foreshadowing for the political posturing.
Hmmm...
The idea of anonymous postings is not all that new. Our nation was founded on this type of thing.
Anonymous postings are what allow people like myself the opportunity to blow the whistle on career politicians like Gene Stipe here in Oklahoma. This fella was a tremendous embarrasment to our otherwise great state. he missused his political power quite a bit and resigned from the State Senate after pleading guilty to making illegal campaign contributions to a Congressional Campaign.
If such a bill was to ever become law as some are hoping it would allow people like Stipe and the Clintons and the Kennedys who clearly have entitlement issues in that they think they are special people entitled to be exempt from public criticism to find out who I am and come after me. As many people are well aware, Oklahoma is regrettably one of several states with criminal libel laws. Recently Stipe tried to have web site operator slapped with these charges after the website operator blew the whistle on him over a fight that he had outside a McCalester bar.
Will we able to continue to blow the whistle on the illegal and unethical activities of the Democrats on the National and State level or will we all end up getting slapped with civil judgments because we contuine to dare to choose to question their actions. It's all going to depend on what happens here with this bill.
JimRob is right, folks. Anonymous postings are free speech are protected under the first amendment. There is no Constitutional right to protection from criticism of one and his or her actions just because people like Gene Stipe says so. whoever is proposing this B.S. and C.F. needs to be put out of business and voted out of office.
There's no way our nation will exist with draconian laws like this in effect.
Regards.....
I was astonished at the text of this bill, and further amazed that it was proposed by a so-called Republican assemblyman. Here is my reply to Mr. Biondi and his ridiculous proposal (which I submitted via his web site along with my name and address).
Dear Assemblyman Biondi,
I am not a citizen of your district, but I am a Republican. I recently read online a draft of a bill sponsored by you that requires internet service providers to maintain identity records for any person who uses their services. The scope of the language in your bill would by virtue of the liability it imposes on internet service providers encompass every private chat room and public discussion forum and information directory, be they political, professional, or otherwise, on the internet. I would not be 100% certain that this was the most ridiculous law I have ever seen proposed regarding the internet, were it not for the fact that the bill provides for no manner in which to protect the privacy of the persons (essentially every person on the planet who uses the internet) who would be required to submit their name and address in order to comply with the law, presumably my means of credit card verification as there is no other expedient and reliable electronic means of establishing identity. So, let me get this straight: a Republican assemblyman has proposed a law that would essentially require every person who uses the internet to disclose their credit card information to every internet service provider they visit, and every service provider would be liable for failing to collect such information? Let me ask you a question Assemblyman Biondi: Have you lost your mind? Is this a joke? How can you call yourself a Republican? I have never heard of you before, being a California citizen, so I Googled your name, and I wagered myself one dollar before I saw the search results that you would be some fanatical liberal Democrat who is well known for proposing ridiculous legislation. Imagine my surprise to discover who you are and the party with which you are affiliated. Sir, as a fellow Republican, and as a citizen of California and the United States of America who wishes to remain free, and unencumbered by ridiculous burdens imposed by the government, I urge you to withdraw at once your proposed bill, along with an apology for even contemplating such a stupid piece of legislation, which is the most obscene invasion of privacy and establishment of liability I have ever seen proposed regarding use of the internet. I have no idea why you proposed this law, but if by chance this was done as an emotional reaction to someone who perhaps unfairly slandered your good name, then Sir, I must say, you have demonstrated well that you are worthy of being spoken of poorly, because this is the most mindless piece of legislation I have ever seen written by a lawmaker. I do hope you will think more carefully about the kind of legislation you propose in the future, or otherwise resign from office immediately so as to not further threaten the freedom and financial well being of the Citizens of your State of New Jersey and of the United States.
Very sincerely,
AMEN and BTTT!!!!!!!, bry2k. Thanks for the response.
Biondi's letter:
Thank you for your e-mail. I understand your concerns with my recently proposed legislation. Based on the number of negative responses I have received about this legislation I have asked the NJ Office of Legislative Services to prepare an opinion regarding this bill's enforceability and constitutionality.
I did not draft this bill with intent to limit freedom of speech. The intent behind this legislation was to bring some civility back to public forums, in particular the forums on www.nj.com. As I receive more feedback from, literally, around the country, it is becoming apparent that the bill may be too broad in scope and in reality not enforceable.
As an aside, this bill was only introduced in January. There have been no committee hearings regarding this bill and there are none scheduled to my knowledge. I am getting inundated with responses which I will review and use to better educate myself on the implications of this bill. If, after reviewing all of the correspondence and the opinion of OLS, it turns out that the bill is, in fact, unworkable, I will certainly reconsider and withdraw it. In other words, this is not something that will happen overnight.
It is unfortunate, from my perspective, that while my intention here was civility and respectfulness, it turns out that it may have gone too far.
Thank you again for your e-mail.
Sincerely,
Pete Biondi
Assemblyman
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.