[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Georgia Internet Police
X-within-URL: http://www.clark.net/pub/rothman/ga.htm
[IMAGE]
Needed: a first-rate lawyer who'll fight the Internet Police law in
court. Click below on the "How We Can Educate" link for more info on
constructive actions.
Return to NetWorld! Book | Other Musing on Intellectual Property
How We Can Educate Pols, Olympic Boosters and Other Georgians | Links of
Interest
Contest: Write the Best "Night the Lights Went Out in Georgia" Parody
The Internet Police Law: The Day the Sites Went Out in Georgia?
David H. Rothman | [email protected]
Linking your Web site to anyone else's without permission? Be glad
you're not in Georgia--or be worried if you are.
Gov. Zell Miller on the morning of April 18 signed into a law a
piece of imbecility that the Marietta Daily Journal had dubbed the
Internet Police bill.
House Bill 1630 may prevent Webfolk from linking from their
homepages against the wishes of the linkees--at least if the other
guys' names or logos are used.
Is 1630 a belated April Fool's joke? I've heard of Net-dumb pols,
but Georgia has out-Exoned Exon--and maybe even out-Doled Dole.
Shari Steele, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation,
wrote Gov. Miller before the signing: "The language of the bill
would make it illegal to create a button on our web site with
Wired's 'trade name' or 'logo' without first obtaining 'permission
or authorization' from Wired magazine." Whoops: oh, please,
Wired--don't sue me. Actually that would be the state's job; you
see, the law would let Georgia throw your posterior in jail for up
to a year.
Live out of state? As of this writing it was unclear how much of a
danger extradition would pose--maybe none, given the lunacy of the
law. Then again, there are rumors that California and other states
may replicate Georgia's stupidity.
The morning the Guv signed the bill, I dropped by the State of
Georgia Home Page. Under "Search Engines and other Web Services" I
saw a link to Yahoo. I'm glad the Georgia folks can use Yahoo from
down there, rather than having to start their own. Imagine Yahoo
needing permission for every link with a trademarked name. And what
about a page displaying the results of a Lycos search? Now that
would be fun. Can you imagine the Lycos computer e-mailing every
site brought up--asking permission--before it listed Web addresses?
I visited Zell Miller's Web area. Without the least irony, a
headline read: "Governor Miller's Technology Initiatives Thrive."
The page bragged about computers in classrooms. Just don't let the
little brats grow up to start Yahoo Kudzu.
According to the EFF, the same law might make it illegal even to
mention a company's name on the Web without permission. True? Just
imagine what this could mean to an online newspaper reviewing
another publication's Web site. Already a software company outside
Georgia has used existing intellectual property law to bully a
reviewer. I've said it once, and I'll say it again: The media are
damned fools if they support intellectual property zealotry of the
kind we've seen out of Capitol Hill recently. Goodbye, First
Amendment. These are national issues, alas, not just problems with
the Georgia drinking water.
If nothing else, I suspect that the good folks at the AT&T
Business Network--the ones who run LeadStory.com, a collection of
the day's hottest stories from online newspapers--may have some
thoughts on the Georgia bill. To add to the fun, when I dropped by
Cox Newspapers' big Web site for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, I
saw a "Surf Less. Know More" ad from LeadStory.com.
At the Atlanta site's Net News I just happened to read a report on
a trademark infringement suit that BellSouth had filed against the
an Internet directory called the Real InterNet Pages. Hmmm. Any
connections here with the new law? And simply because BellSouth's
print directories use the trademarked phrase "The Real Yellow
Pages," is the company entitled to www.realpages.com--the smaller
company's existing Web address? The Real InterNet Pages, after
all, isn't saying, "www.realyellowpages.com." In any event one would
hardly confuse the Real InterNet Pages with BellSouth; the pigmy
tells visitors to its home page: "Not Affiliated, Associated or
Connected with BellSouth or any BellSouth-related company."
Coincidentally or not, the Internet Police bill was introduced by
Don Parsons, a Net-innocent employee of BellSouth. According to the
Conservative Policy Caucus in the Georgia House: "During floor
debate, Rep. Parsons could not explain the concept of a link on a
home page. It was clear to many that he had no idea of what the
Internet was all about. Supposedly, his desire was to prevent
'misrepresentation' on the Internet. Parsons admitted that he had
never been on the Internet, except looking over a colleague's
shoulder at work." One can understand, then, why many Netfolks
wonder if Parsons' employer has encouraged him to squelch
competition at a time when the Baby Bells envision a Web full of
Yellow Pages. Bell South vehemently denies a connection between it
and the Parsons bill. Whatever the case, however, the legislation
would help the Parsons' employer.
Oh, I've read Parsons' stated reasons for his law. But in guarding
against fraud and protecting intellectual property rights, do we
really want to toss out the First Amendment? Jeff Kuester, a Net-hip
attorney of intellectual property in Atlanta, says: "We should
certainly strive for effective protection of intellectual property
on the Web, but not by destroying this crucial part of the
information superhighway. These links let people move seamlessly
from Web site to Web site. They're as crucial to the Web as bridges
are to our nation's system of concrete-and-asphalt roads. If nothing
else, we should avoid denying Netizens the free speech guaranteed
outside cyberspace." While Parsons has denied that his law would
make unauthorized links illegal, its wording would suggest
otherwise.
Criticizing Parsons' work, the Conservative Policy Caucus quotes
the essence of HB1630 as it could affect links, and I'll pass on a
rough extract with some tweaks of my own for the sake of clarity and
precision: "It shall be unlawful for any person...knowingly to
transmit any data through a computer network...if such data uses any
individual name, trade name, registered trademark, logo, legal or
official seal or copyrighted symbol to falsely state or imply that
such person...has permission or is legally authorized to use such
trade name, registered trademark..."
Granted, some might say that you could assume implied consent if
any material is up on an open medium like the Web and you want to
link to it with appropriate identification by name. But the law is
still a big threat, given the new legal liabilities it creates for
journalists, publishers, activists and many others. Suppose your
story online won't read like a puff piece. Will you need your
target's goodwill before you can link to the site of a polluter or
other recipient of negative publicity? And what about linking
privately? Suppose you're on a local area network in the newsroom
and want to share information with colleagues by way of an internal
Web page. Will you require at least your target's tacit consent
before you can do so? Exactly what does HB1630 mean by "a computer
network," just the external variety? Not in my extract above was
this additional language: "for the purpose of setting up,
maintaining, operating, or exchanging data with an electronic
mailbox, home page, or any other electronic information storage bank
or point of access to electronic information." Sounds as if the
Internet Police law won't delight the Society for Professional
Journalists, Investigative Reporters and Editors or the Reporter's
Committee for Freedom of the Press.
Bill 1630 also contains other goodies, according to the valuable
April 17 issue of EFFector Online and the EFF's Steele. For example,
Ms. Steele says the bill could criminalize the use of pseudonyms;
I'd suspect that's of interest to, say, American Online or to
safety-minded parents who want their children to log on with fake
names. Besides, just what's a "false" name? Ms. Steele writes of
someone with the user name of "elvis" and says: "Even my own user
ID, which is ssteele, does not clearly distinguish me from others
with the last name of Steele and the first initial 'S.'"
I myself am another good example of the identity issues that
arise on a global computer network. My publisher insisted on calling
my book NetWorld!, and it was logical for me to set up a NetWorld!
Web site but guess what? If you do an Alta Vista search, you'll also
find thousands of "NetWorld" mentions from unrelated "NetWorld"
sites and the rest of the Web. Among the others are Peter's Networld
from Peter Heneback, a Swedish foreign exchange student at West
Anchorage High School in Alaska; NETWorld Market Place; NetWorld
Publishing; NetWorld Systems; Networld +Interop, which, yes, has
been known to hold expos down in Atlanta; and NetWorld Limited, a
Hong Kong consulting company.
And I'm to worry about other "NetWorlds" and "Networlds" from
Alaska to Atlanta and Asia?
While trademark law has its place, we need to allow for reasonable
interpretations. I asked Prima Publishing to consult an attorney
before it used NetWorld! on pulped wood. No problem, I heard. But
what happens to my book's online version if I'm in Georgia and
trademark fanatics prevail in court?
There and elsewhere, politicians keep babbling that they'll get
government off our backs. What bilge. If Georgia politicans respect
citizens' rights, why is the high-tech community talking of a
lawsuit against the Internet Police law? Alas, the Georgia state
legislature won't meet again until next year, but meanwhile Zell
Miller might speak out against his baby before it frightens away
millions of dollars of high-tech business. Perhaps he can at least
promise to ask his attorney general not to enforce the Internet
Police law. As long as the law is still alive, I myself will do
everything I can to warn Netfolks that Georgia is a risky place for
them to do business right now.
Meanwhile, I suspect that the Internet Police law will be like Jim
Exon's Communications Decency Act. Many people will just ignore it,
furthering breaking down the respect of Generation Net for
politicians and bureaucrats in general.
Return to Top of Page [IMAGE]
HOW TO PROTEST THE SILLINESS
_______________________________________________________________
The Internet Police bill--effective July 1, 1996--passed at least
partly because politicians kowtowed to Big Bucks. Tell them they
were wrong, that the bill will cost Georgia, that it's about as
good for the state as Sherman's March was, that you'll tell your
high-tech employer to stay the hell out of Georgia to avoid
net.stupid regulations, that you'll think twice about attending the
Olympics or buying goods that carry the Olympic logo.
Let Georgia pols know that most Web sites thrive because of the
ease of linking, not in spite of it. Time Magazine has zillions of
links all over the Net. And without bureaucratic intervention,
Netfolks already enjoy a wealth of phone- and Net-directories such
as Yahoo's.
Tell the Georgians that the Internet Police bill is a creature of
special interests such as phone companies and, yes, politicians
trying to crimp uppity rivals, including those in the Conservative
Caucus. Some establishmentarians hated the idea of the
conservatives' using the official Georgia seal on their Web site.
This issue transcends ideology--my own politics are progressive.
Protesting, you should avoid obscenity. Be angry in a rational and
responsible way. Don't justify the anti-Net stereotypes that
technophobes love.
Georgia contacts
[IMAGE] Gov. Zell Miller. I'd include an email address for Gov.
Miller, but I couldn't find one--maybe I'm looking in the wrong
locations on the Web, or perhaps in the wrong universe. His office
phone number is 404-656-1776. Fax: 404-656-5948. Snail: Governor
Zell Miller, State Capitol, Atlanta, Georgia 30334. It's just as
well, actually, that you not use electronic mail since I doubt
that the governor's office is that Net Aware. Otherwise why the Exon
would he have signed this turkey?
[IMAGE] Conservative Policy Caucus of the Georgia House of
Representatives. You can email Georgia Representative Mitchell Kaye,
the Webmaster, at [email protected]. Click here for Kaye's
report on Parsons and the anti-Net law. Arm the Caucus with letters
it can use to fight this atrocity. What the Net needs now, says
Representative Kaye, is a court injunction against enforcement of
the law. Anyone know a first-rate lawyer willing to work pro bono
and make a name for himself or herself? If so, e-mail or phone
Mitchell Kaye (770-998-2399), the legislator who so far has spent
the most time and energy fighting the Internet Police law. Perhaps
this case could be a natural for a group such as the American Civil
Liberties Union or the Interactive Services Assocation, whose
members include American Online, CompuServe and Prodigy, among
others. One legislator has talked of corrective legislation, but
according to Kaye's current thinking, a court challenge at this
point would be more effective, since other politicians could water
down a bill. At any rate, a bill couldn't be formally introduced
until January 1996; and, says, Kaye, a court case could be the best
approach. Stay tuned. Foes of the law are still sorting out their
options as far as the best way to proceed.
[IMAGE] E-mail addresses of members of the Georgia House, via the
Conservative Policy Caucus. Remember, some of the people listed may
be supporters of the Police Bill.
[IMAGE] Names, addresses, home, office, and FAX numbers of state
legislators. Click here and scroll down the list for contact
information for Georgia House Speaker Thomas B. Murphy. Do not
harass him--it'll just backfire. If you can manage, try instead to
educate him; see if you can't save your anger for posts on the Net.
[IMAGE] Don Parsons' phone number (770-728-8506) and FAX number
(770-528-5754) and other contact info. Again, please avoid
harassment! But do give him a piece of your mind; ideally you can
fax Parsons, then email a cc: to Rep. Mitchell Kaye
([email protected]), a vehement critic of the Net Police law. First,
read Don Parsons' defense of his baby. Among other things he writes
that "Internet users - consumers, children, business people, clergy,
etc., - have a right to expect that the Internet pages they visit
are what they are presented to be." My response? Word on the Net
circulates pretty quickly about frauds, and existing laws cover many
situations. New, Internet-specific laws--against fraud or copyright
violations--need to be much better crafted than HB1630 was. Above
all, they must be infinitely more respectful of the First Amendment.
[IMAGE] Georgia Attorney General Michael Bowers. His phone number is
404-656-4585; his fax number, 404-657-8733; and his snail address
is: Judicial Building, Atlanta, Georgia 30334.
[IMAGE] State of Georgia Home Page. Poke around. Look for pressure
points--people associated with tourism and other business. See
below.
[IMAGE] Georgia Department of Industry, Trade & Tourism, "Georgia's
official state agency for developing new jobs and creating capital
investment." Sign the guest book; register your company's lack of
interest in relocating there while the Internet Police bill is in
effect. Use the "Description of Business" field and ask that the
Webmaster forward your opinion to policymakers.
[IMAGE] Yahoo listings for 1996 Olympic Games. Use the "mailto's"
(where you click to start writing a letter) and sign the guest books
with protests against Georgia's medieval information policies.
[IMAGE] 1996 Olympic Games Home Page. Give 'em a piece of your mind
on the feedback page.
[IMAGE] BellSouth's Olympic links. Yes, BellSouth is an official
sponsor. So if the Olympic folks take awhile to get the point,
you'll know why. Of course you might try complaining to BellSouth
itself--the president is Carl E. Swearington, telephone
770-391-2424; fax, 770-399-6355.
[IMAGE] Cable News Network (CNN), whose Web site will be directly
affected by the imbecility out of the state legislature. The
feedback address is [email protected]. Give 'em permission to use
your name and address on the feedback page. Oh, and while you're at
it, you might ask CNN to forward your sentiments to Scott Woelfel,
editor in chief of CNN Interactive. Tell him it's ok to link to
this page, and suggest that the video part of CNN just might want to
warn the world about the Internet Police bill.
[IMAGE] E-mail, fax and snail addresses and phone numbers for the
Georgia media--including the Atlanta papers and the Associated Press
down there. From the Conservative Caucus.
[IMAGE] Georgia Media List from Harden Political InfoSystems.
Newspapers, magazines and broadcasters. Looks extremely
comprehensive.
[IMAGE] Thinking Right, a reader comment area of the Atlanta
Journal. Speak up! Let Atlanta know that Georgia's on your mind!
The "Piney Pete Sez" column of April 20 says of the Internet Police
bill: "What prompted this action was not widespread abuse. It was
one little gadfly, Rep. Mitchell Kaye, who's been using the great
seal of Georgia on his conservative Website. Needless to say, Kaye
is a Republican and consequently shut out of any highway largess,
concrete or electronic."
Return to Top of Page
[IMAGE]
MORE LINKS
_______________________________________________________________
[IMAGE] Full text of the Internet Police bill.
[IMAGE] Electronic Frontier Foundation.
[IMAGE] April 17 EFF newsletter with details on the Internet Police
bill.
[IMAGE] Bell South Denies Lobbying for the Police Law. Rep. Don
Parsons, sponsor of House Bill 1630, works for BellSouth; but the
company wrote attorney Jeff Kuester a letter saying Parsons does not
serve as a lobbyist--and that the actual lobbyists were "totally
unaware" of the company's suit against the Real InterNet Pages. The
letter said, "Bell South did not draft, sponsor, promote or lobby
for 1630. Bell South took no position on the legislation whatsoever
other than, when it was brought to our attention, to recommend an
exemption from liability for telephone companies and Internet access
providers who provide transmission services for their customers."
BellSouth did say that "it is probably probably overkill and unduly
complicating to make the act of trademark infringement,
misrepresentation and passing off on the Internet a crime under
state law." The company also offered observations on the law's
effects on links--thoughts with which the Electronic Frontier
Foundation would undoubtedly disagree.
[IMAGE] The Prize-winning Web Page of Jeff Kuester, the Net-hip
intellectual property attorney mentioned earlier, who also has an
engineering background and is active in groups such as IEEE. You can
bet that like Kuester, scads of other Georgians love the Net and are
just as surprised and disappointed by the Internet Police law as the
rest of us were. He has a page with relevant links about the law.
Kuester ([email protected]) is working to bring state pols up
to speed on Net law and technology, and he would like to expand his
efforts at the national level. Send him a note if you're interested
in helping out. A good cause! Note, too, the existence of a
Congressional Internet Caucus. Education of policymakers is the best
protection against Net-stupid legislation like HB1630. Perhaps even
Parsons will see the light someday. Meanwhile, if you want to check
out some first-class resources on the Net and intellectual property
law, drop on by Kuester's site!
[IMAGE] The Real InterNet Pages, the Net directory that the
$18-billion BellSouth conglomerate is suing for alleged trademark
infringement. BellSouth holds a trademark on the phrase "The Real
Yellow Pages," but does that automatically entitle the company to
"realpages.com" on the Net? Read why a BellSouth triumph could hurt
you. The boys at realpages.com have put together a nice Web page
with a yellow background ("we don't think they own the color yellow
either"). E-mail your support to Don Madey at [email protected].
Any lawyers out there willing to do pro bono? Publicity from such a
case could be an excellent career-enhancer.
[IMAGE] c|net News Article on the Police Law.
[IMAGE] Georgia Cyberphobes, the Augusta Chronicle's editorial
against the Net police bill--written just before Gov. Miller signed
it. The Chronicle didn't see the HR1630's trademark-related
language as a threat but objected to the attack on online anonymity.
It called for Miller to vero the bill.
[IMAGE] Editor and Publisher. He explains how links help
electronic newspapers. Note: The just-supplied link will soon
disappear, but when that happens, you might be able to find the
column in his archives.
Return to Top of Page
[IMAGE]
YOUR OWN "NIGHT THE LIGHTS WENT OUT" PARODY? I'M LOOKING FOR THE RIGHT ONE
_______________________________________________________________
Who can come up with the best "Night the Lights Went Out in
Georgia" parody-in the spirit of this site?
Give it a shot. May 18 is the contest deadline, and I may extend
it if Netfolks are too angry to concentrate long enough come up with
a quotable parody. No prizes, just some exquisite notoriety.
Please do not enter, of course, if you mind having scads of other
Web sites link to your words.
-David H. Rothman, [email protected]
_______________________________________________________________
Top of Page | Return to NetWorld!
[IMAGE]
Linking Encouraged. No Permission Needed from Me, Especially
if You're in Georgia!
_______________________
Regards, Men govern nothing with more difficulty than their tongues,
and can moderate their desires more than their words. -Spinoza
Joseph Reagle http://farnsworth.mit.edu/~reagle/home.html
[email protected] E0 D5 B2 05 B6 12 DA 65 BE 4D E3 C1 6A 66 25 4E