Does Cyberstalking Need A Separate Law?
from the what-is-it-about-the-computer-that-makes-it-different? dept
Over in Australia, they're apparently putting in place a cyberstalking law that will mean jail-time for those who harass others "using a telecommunications device". Why do they need this special law to apply to the use of a telecommunications device? Why not just have a stalking law that will apply to those who "cyberstalk" as well? The action should be illegal, not the method by which the action occurred. Update: Here's another article on the subject that covers this is a dreadful law that could end up putting protesters in jail.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Same as patents
Of course it's all crap--politicians either like to make themselves look good or are just plain stupid. Not only do existing laws fit just fine in covering 95% of internet actions, but at all it would take is pressing charges against a violator, presenting a solid, reasonable case on why for example "cyberstalking" is guilty according to the existing stalking laws and precedent will be set.
I say 95% because there are a few cases where the internet does require special legislation because it is different than anything else--spam of course being the obvious example because phone, mail, etc all mean advertisers paying several orders of magnitude more per message than email and the receivers actually being forced to actually pay for the message (through ISPs).
[ link to this | view in thread ]