ARIZONA BILL TO CENSOR INTERNET BITES THE DUST...
Arizona's House Bill 2549, which was labeled by one critic as a "bill to censor electronic speech," has been stopped, according to one of the bill's sponsors.
As we've already mentioned twice before, the bill was never transferred to the governor, contrary to the numerous media reports saying it has. The bill was amended before it passed the Senate, meaning it was returned to the House -- where it's apparently been stopped.
State Representative Vic Williams tells New Times that legislators have received quite a bit of "legitimate concerns" -- and illegitimate concerns -- about the bill, and Representative Ted Vogt has stopped the bill from moving forward so everyone can figure it out.
Williams says the actual intent of the bill is not to throw Internet trolls in jail -- the intent was to protect people from harassment and stalking, and defend people's privacy.
"We believed we were moving forward in good faith," Williams says.
The bill was not exactly interpreted that way by others.
The Media Coalition, one of the biggest critics of the bill, has been citing one of the proposed changes to current statute, which calls for prohibiting the use of "any electronic or digital device, instead of a telephone, with the intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend a person." Source
As we've already mentioned twice before, the bill was never transferred to the governor, contrary to the numerous media reports saying it has. The bill was amended before it passed the Senate, meaning it was returned to the House -- where it's apparently been stopped.
State Representative Vic Williams tells New Times that legislators have received quite a bit of "legitimate concerns" -- and illegitimate concerns -- about the bill, and Representative Ted Vogt has stopped the bill from moving forward so everyone can figure it out.
Williams says the actual intent of the bill is not to throw Internet trolls in jail -- the intent was to protect people from harassment and stalking, and defend people's privacy.
"We believed we were moving forward in good faith," Williams says.
The bill was not exactly interpreted that way by others.
The Media Coalition, one of the biggest critics of the bill, has been citing one of the proposed changes to current statute, which calls for prohibiting the use of "any electronic or digital device, instead of a telephone, with the intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend a person." Source
