IP address | Rational Arrogance

Well, for one thing; they seem to believe that words are even more dangerous than bullets…

“Whatever you might believe about anonymous comments and/or gun ownership, it’s difficult to put both of these laws together and not see some sort of extreme hypocrisy.”

Mike Masnick

Yes, that’s right! While the Turkish officials are facing widely international criticism for jailing independent journalists, comparing their articles to terrorists bullets, several US states are introducing laws that ban anonymous comments on websites and the same time proposes rules to keep information on gun owners anonymous.

Personally, I can’t help wondering: Where do all this craziness come from?

But I’m obviously not the only one asking this question. Over et Techdirt.com they’re focusing on Illinois State Senator, Ira I. Silverstein, who recently introduced an almost identical bill to the one some New York politicians tried to push through last year.

Here’s the widely mocked NY wording:

A WEB SITE ADMINISTRATOR UPON REQUEST SHALL REMOVE ANY COMMENTS POSTED ON HIS OR HER WEB SITE BY AN ANONYMOUS POSTER UNLESS SUCH ANONYMOUS POSTER AGREES TO ATTACH HIS OR HER NAME TO THE POST AND CONFIRMS THAT HIS OR HER IP ADDRESS, LEGAL NAME, AND HOME ADDRESS ARE ACCURATE. ALL WEB SITE ADMINISTRATORS SHALL HAVE A CONTACT NUMBER OR E-MAIL ADDRESS POSTED FOR SUCH REMOVAL REQUESTS, CLEARLY VISIBLE IN ANY SECTIONS WHERE COMMENTS ARE POSTED.

And here’s the Illinois wording.

Creates the Internet Posting Removal Act. Provides that a web site administrator shall, upon request, remove any posted comments posted by an anonymous poster unless the anonymous poster agrees to attach his or her name to the post and confirms that his or her IP address, legal name, and home address are accurate.

Meanwhile, Techdirt.com notes the ultimate irony that the very same Ira I. Silverstein, just days after introducing that bill to effectively ban internet anonymity, proposed another bill to keep gun owner info anonymous, amending the freedom of information act to exempt firearms ownership data from being available to the public.

“Whatever you might believe about anonymous comments and/or gun ownership, it’s difficult to put both of these laws together and not see some sort of extreme hypocrisy,” Mike Masnick at Techdirt writes.

However, it seems to be a spreading attitude amongst politicians worldwide that words are, in fact, more dangerous than bullets.

Like I wrote in yesterday’s post about the situation surrounding Turkish journalists:

“In a recent speech, the Minister of the Interior, Idris Naim Sahin, compared writers and journalists to Kurdistan Workers’ party fighters, saying there was ”no difference between the bullets fired in and the articles written in Ankara”.”

Social Influence? Use It!

Meet the Internet Posting Removal Act, an Illinois Bill That’ll Make Your Head Spin (webpronews.com)
Turkey Frees 10 Pro-Kurdish Politicians (voanews.com)
Turkish police raid leftist group after U.S. embassy bombing (Reuters) (newsdaily.com)

All Human Rights Reserved (h) 2013

The latest in the global merry-go-round of the legacy entertainment industry seeking to put in place draconian legislation is apparently Norway, the website Techdirt.com has made me aware of. I did, however, report that the Norwegian government was working on a new set of laws who would make certain online activities illegal some time ago, but I did not think that the lawmakers would stretch it as far as to allow IP identification, and give the IPS companies the power to block access to sites they believe to be infringing copyrights.

“When every copyright holder can seek to completely shut down a site, the likelihood of trouble is immense.”

Techdirt.com

There’s not much focus on this matter in Norway. In fact, I have not seen a single Norwegian media representative write a single word on the rather controversial side of the story – just a few notes vaguely mentioning something about not being able to publish whatever you want on your blog anymore. Another reminder of how rational ignorance (and plain ignorance) allows the most ridiculous laws and regulations to pass without as much as an attempt to make a counter argument.

This is what Techdirt writes:

“A couple years ago, I went to Norway for Nordic Music Week, and had a great time talking to musicians, managers and labels, about all of the opportunity for new music business models. It was a fun and optimistic event, seeing everyone looking at all of the opportunities out there. But, of course, these were mostly independent artists. The major labels stayed away. And that’s because the only “opportunity” they seem to see is in drafting the latest version of draconian laws that will do little to stop infringement, but which will have tremendous unintended consequences, including the potential to stifle widespread legitimate forms of expression.”

TorrentFreak reports on the latest anti-piracy bill being put forth in Norway, which includes site-blocking provisions:

In May 2011 the Ministry of Culture announced that it had put forward proposals for amendments to the Copyright Act which would “..give licensees the tools they need to follow-up on copyright infringement on the Internet, while protecting privacy.”

The key proposals included making it easier for rightsholders to identify infringers from their IP addresses and amendments to the law to allow ISP-level blocking of sites deemed to be infringing copyright.

“The article quotes people who are quite worried about what this will mean in practice. When every copyright holder can seek to completely shut down a site, the likelihood of trouble is immense,” techdirt points out.

“Already, here in the US, we see regular abuse of the DMCA to take down specific content that people deem infringing, but which is often just content they don’t like. Imagine the ability to do that on a larger scale, such that it doesn’t just take down the content, but entire sites.”