"Internet Police" bill passes Why does Rep. Don Parsons (R-Marietta) an employee of a regulated utility want to regulate the Net? [INLINE] "Secrecy and a free democratic government don't mix." Harry S. Truman Many do not understand the Internet and that its impact is truly revolutionary. It embodies everything that has made America great including a pioneering spirit and search for that final frontier, cutting edge technology and free speech. With the Internet, for the first time in world history, everyone can be a source for global communications and the dissemination of information. Unlike many closed societies like red China, North Korea and Cuba, in the U.S. there is no government controlled "official" media that supercedes private sources. The beauty of the Internet is that you can access any part of the web from almost anywhere in the world. And, it is truly democratic, as anyone, not just the media giants, can broadcast to the world for almost no money. What this means is that small business can compete on equal footing with the larger companies. Also, with over 100,000 new web sites in the past year alone being created, more and more people are becoming information providers. No individual, group or government or company controls the outlet for information dissemination. Truly American!! However, some people in state government do not like this web site which provides information on the Georgia House of Representatives. They have accused the Conservative Policy Caucus and its webmaster, Rep. Mitchell Kaye (R-Marietta), of illegally using the state seal on this site, a charge that has proven to be without merit. Current state law allows duly elected legislators to use the state seal for official purposes. It also allows the use of the seal in political campaigns, including on signs, billboards, mailings, etc. Why an elected official would want to use the seal during a campaign is beyond most responsible legislators' comprehension. Please note that HB1630 does not affect this (Conservative Policy Caucus) web site in any way. Background On February 5th, Rep. Ray Holland (D-Ashburn) introduced House Bill 1609 to restrict the use of the Georgia State seal by properly elected public officials during campaigns (we support that) or when there is "any attempt to influence the public with respect to political issues." Rep. Holland's co-sponsors included the most powerful members of the House, such as House Speaker Thomas B. Murphy (the longest reigning House Speaker in the United States), Rep. Bill Lee (Chairman of the Rules committee and 40-year House veteran), Rep. Larry Walker (Majority Leader), Rep. Jack Connell (Speaker Pro-Tempore), Rep. Tommy Chambless (Chairman of the Judiciary committee) and Rep. Tommy Stephenson (Majority Whip). The fact that such a powerful group introduced a bill in response to this site, said something about their desire to have widespread dissemination of information on legislative activities. Richard Nixon once said that "There is no such thing as a nonpolitical speech by a politician." Majority leader Larry Walker said this past year that "You can't take the politics out of politics." Since any and every act by an elected official could be construed to be political, the effect of this bill would have prevented all elected officials, including the Governor, from using the state seal, except under the most innocuous of circumstances and purposes. The bill died in the Judiciary committee. The "Internet Police" Bill On February 8th, HB1630 was introduced by Rep. Don Parsons, (404-728-8506, sorry no known e-mail address) an employee of BellSouth, a regulated utility. Parsons ran for office and lost in 1992 as a Democrat, and "switched" parties just to get elected in 1994. Many in the Republican party believe he never really changed, especially when viewing his voting record and the many votes cast against most if not all of the GOP House members on strictly party-line votes. The Marietta Daily Journal termed Parsons' legislation as the "Internet Police" bill. It is the first attempt in Georgia at Internet regulation and ties in nicely with his regulatory background and propensity for more government involvement. The bill was amended in committee and after approximately 3 hours of debate on the House floor was again amended before final passage. 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 colleagues shoulder at work. As reported in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Shari Steele, staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation dismissed the bill as "poorly crafted" and probably unconstitutional. Said Steele "It looks like another attempt by legislators who don't know what they are doing to try and legislate what they don't know about. They should get online." When the bill was heard in the Senate committee, Parsons used this Conservative Policy Caucus site as an example of misrepresentation. Upon further questioning, Parsons admitted that he had NEVER seen this site. (He has since seen this site, and reportedly now has an on-line account with a commercial provider.) The bill was heard a second time in committee and was amended without any objections from Parsons, before being sent to the Rules committee and towards the full Senate. Throughout this whole process, Rep. Bill Lee, (D-Forest Park) Chairman of the powerful House Rules Committee was actively promoting the bill through many subtle and not so subtle tactics. The bill was "moved" out of the Senate Rules Committee by Senate Majority Leader Sonny Purdue (D-Bonaire). A floor amendment offered by Cobb county Senators Lamutt and Tanksley, and approved by Parsons, was adopted prior to unanimous passage of the bill by the full Senate. Back in the House, Parsons disagreed with the Senate amendments, as he distorted the facts by saying he did not agree to any Senate amendments. The Senate withdrew their amendments and the bill has been sent to the Governor in the form as passed by the House. What is Wrong with HB1630? The bill states that "It shall be unlawful for any person...to transmit any data through...or exchanging data with an electronic mailbox (e-mail)...if such data uses any individual name...to falsely identify the person..." Since most e-mail addresses, including those randomly given by Compuserve and Prodigy, do not identify the individual, this bill may make such use unlawful. This same illegality may also apply to those who use citizen band (CB) radios. CB users generally identify themselves through "handles" (nicknames). This type of falsely identification may be covered under this bill and thus prohibited since data is transmitted over the airwaves (like cellular modems for the Internet). The bill specifically prohibits an act to "falsely identify the person" by transmitting data with any "electronic information storage bank or point of access to electronic information..." Wouldn't a CB radio also be considered a point of access? How about a fax machine or a telephone answering machine...wouldn't these also be considered "electronic information storage banks"? Hmmm. Is that what the author intended? The more you look into the ramifications of this bill, the more it appears to be unconstitutional from a freedom of speech point of view. There are constitutional protections for those who write books under "pen" names and for those who distribute political flyers anonymously or through the use of newly-created "front" organizations. (See U.S. Supreme Court 4/19/95 decision in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission Synopsis and Complete Opinion) The latter is unethical and improper, but not a crime. Would CB and Internet users not have this same constitutional protection or would they be classified differently? Another problem with the bill relates to the mechanics of the Internet itself. One powerful tool of the Internet is in the seamless ability to use an electronic link to visit another web site. It is a form of promotion or advertising and most "linkees" would probably be flattered to be put on another's site as a link. However, linking without permisssion may be unlawful. HB1630 states: "It shall be unlawful for any person...to transmit any data...if such data uses any individual name, trade name, registered trademark...which would imply that such person...has permission or is legally authorized to use such trade name, registered trademark..." This potential prohibition touches on a gray area but would still serve to chill proliferating Internet expansion and usage. Many realtors link to local sites of interest (to show potential visitors/purchasers what is going on in their area). This activity may be unlawful without permission. Chilling affect...maybe. Ever try and get in touch with a government agency to get permission for anything? Not so easy is it! If you don't think there's value in links, check out this site about the Northeast Georgia Mountains. This site is fantastic! Anyone visiting this site would want to visit this beautiful area and probably spend a few dollars on meals, lodging, etc. It definitely promotes economic activity and job creation in this area. Other forms of economic activity may be stifled. In the past few weeks AT&T, BellSouth and MCI have announced plans to become Internet providers, and MindSpring Enterprises, Inc., an Atlanta company, has gone public with a stock offering. This must mean jobs, taxes and economic activity. Hmmmm... Another part of the bill makes it illegal to use a trade name, registered trademark, logo, legal or official seal or copyrighted symbol. However, this is already illegal under federal and state law. Besides, it would be virtually impossible to "police" the Internet within Georgia's borders, since this is a global network. What can we do to stop HB1630? Urge the Governor to Veto HB 1630. Please write or fax (404-656-5948) to the Governor, in care of the following person ASAP (before bill is signed): Mr. Mark Cohen, Executive Counsel to Governor Zell Miller State Capitol Atlanta, Georgia 30334 [NOTE: It's too late for that. The bill was signed into law Apr. 18, 1996.]