net anon annoyance law: so they can prosecute you without revealing survei

llance (surveillance): it just occurs to me whether a motivation for the new law which allegedly makes it illegal to annoy someone with online speech if you don't reveal your name is: so that they can take you to court without having to reveal the surveillance which linked your pseudonym to your real name.

It would suck for them if in order to sue Elmer Duff posting as John Q. Moranbeater for posting too many times on DU that Dick Cheney can fuck himself, they had to reveal how they made the linkage between the Moranbeater pseudonym and Mr. Duff's real name. Lessee: DU ID -> IP address -> ISP -> ISP logs which they don't keep except if they have a warrant -> ISP account holder.

Wow, that would mean a lot of demands for private records from ISPs and server owners. Further, those records would have to be there to be demanded - i.e., Mr. Duff's history of posting for the last 2 years that Dick Cheney can go fuck himself would have to be provable via access records kept at the ISP, so proving it would mean revealing that ISPs routinely keep logs of customer activity for extended periods of time.

Imagine how shocked, shocked the public would be to learn that there is surveillance going on in the US. And on our latest toy, the internet. You mean people are reading my mail and keeping a record of what websites I visit ? You must be kidding.

I guess that's the problem with doing secret stuff - if you want to talk about it it isn't secret anymore.

Fuck yourselves, surveillance twits. Note that I don't give a flying fuck if this annoys you or not, you can continue to lick my ass until you enjoy the taste. Since I don't give a flying fuck whether I annoy you or not, it can't be the case that I intended to annoy you.

Your logic, or lack of it, is impeccable!

Fuck Cheney...

And, uh... you too Agent Mike. :hi:

FUCK YOU DICK