Ain't it annoying!

Rhianna doesn't like poorly drafted legislation because any law written in vague terms is destined to have multiple repercussions.

The recent buzz is about the most ridiculous law since Prohibition or otherwise known as the "be boring as pap on the Internet" law.

So how are other bloggers reacting to this federal "blacken the bloggers' eyes" one-two-punch legislation? If you'd like a laugh from the writings of a media subversive, read Stowe Boyd's "Anonymous Trolls, Beware: You Are Breaking Federal Laws. Get Real: Stowe Boyd's Soapbox"

Anyone concerned about protecting digital rights should read the Electronic Frontier Foundation's EFF: DeepLinks. The EFF spells out the serious side to this:

"If this poorly drafted law (both before and after this provision) is not limited by the courts, it could open the door to invasive subpoenas for identity information. Under established case law, plaintiffs must demonstrate that they have viable claims against the defendant before a court will allow a subpoena for the defendant's identity. Moreover, under this criminal provision, vague words like "annoy" could make it easier for aggressive prosecutors to allege an intent to annoy, and go after people who were only engaging in voracious public debate."[1]

(Just remember, Rhianna likes a good debate)

Do not despair, the EEF highlights this important consideration:

"the new law still excludes "interactive computer services" from the definition of telecommunications device (223(h)(1)(B)), meaning that anonymously using online services such as blogs and message boards may be unaffected by the change. That is to say, one could argue that the law only requires you to identify yourself to the blog service or message board provider, but not to the world."[2]