JSM: The case has gotten a lot of people "up in arms".
There is always two sides, and while I would like to vote for the poster, I have no idea what he said, or didn't say.
I happen to agree with the "no immunity" idea, but like anything else, it will probably be abused by some.
I mean, calling someone say, a carrot on the internet isn't something I would get upset about, but what if a person went to a hundred different sites, and said that someone was a child molester.
and.... The poster used his/her victims name and address.
All of it being untrue of course, but the person lost their job because of it.
Should the originator of the smear campaign have "immunity" because some people have this crazy idea that this is "freedom of speech"?
You know, the old.."Tough noogies" approach.
I also believe that it is a federal offense to threaten to kill someone on the internet.
Why not allow that?
That is only "talk" also, if you want to make a case for that.
IMO, This issue is a complex one, and I think it's only just being sorted out.
I still say that the days of the "wild west internet" are almost over.
Have a good one, and good luck with your stock picks.
|
