tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6475374286669122016.post1874666704035661133..comments2023-03-30T07:44:44.820-04:00Comments on Collected Thoughts: GrokLaw is at it againCeolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6475374286669122016.post-71422684926381253252008-11-29T15:23:00.000-05:002008-11-29T15:23:00.000-05:00I think it's MySpace, not Friendster.People sh...I think it's MySpace, not Friendster.<BR/><BR/>People shouldn't have to use painfully obvious names such as "John Q Smith" if they want to avoid using full legal identities.<BR/><BR/>I believe PJ (Groklaw) is worried that this judge has accepted that violation of private TOS constitutes a criminal act; this sets a precedent that any website you register for can retroactively criminalize you -- to the tune of $100,000 & 1 year in prison. That seems like a very bad breakdown of the civil/criminal distinction.<BR/><BR/>You may be confident that most judges will know better than to honor this precedent as generally inappropriate. I am not comfortable with it -- judges do not always make the right judgement call; the law and precedent should be as good as we can make them. Selective enforcement never ends up fair.<BR/><BR/>If in this case, MySpace's TOS were held over the First Amendment, then we cannot trust that the First Amendment will protect us from TOS in the future.<BR/><BR/>From another perspective, I don't trust MySpace, AOL, Facebook, Yahoo, MS (Live), Google, Hulu, HP, Amazon, B&N, Blizzard, and everybody else with a website, to not misuse the CFAA if they have it in their legal arsenal.<BR/><BR/>But thanks for calling PJ (and me) developmentally stunted!reppephttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14787095695233253765noreply@blogger.com