Passed, when signed by Governor goes into effect on July 1, 2004.
AN ACT Relating to the prevention of cyberstalking; amending RCW 9A.46.060 and 9A.46.100; reenacting and amending RCW 9.94A.515 and 9.94A.515; adding a new section to chapter 9.61 RCW; prescribing penalties; providing an effective date; providing an expiration date; and declaring an emergency.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
{+ NEW SECTION. +} Sec. 1. A new section is added to chapter 9.61 RCW to read as follows:
(1) A person is guilty of cyberstalking if he or she, with intent to harass, intimidate, torment, or embarrass any other person, and under circumstances not constituting telephone harassment, makes an electronic communication to such other person or a third party:
(a) Using any lewd, lascivious, indecent, or obscene words, images, or language, or suggesting the commission of any lewd or lascivious act;
(b) Anonymously or repeatedly whether or not conversation occurs; or
(c) Threatening to inflict injury on the person or property of the person called or any member of his or her family or household.
(2) Cyberstalking is a gross misdemeanor, except as provided in subsection (3) of this section.
(3) Cyberstalking is a class C felony if either of the following applies:
(a) The perpetrator has previously been convicted of the crime of harassment, as defined in RCW 9A.46.060, with the same victim or a member of the victim's family or household or any person specifically named in a no-contact order or no-harassment order in this or any other state; or
(b) The perpetrator engages in the behavior prohibited under subsection (1)(c) of this section by threatening to kill the person threatened or any other person.
(4) Any offense committed under this section may be deemed to have been committed either at the place from which the communication was made or at the place where the communication was received.
(5) For purposes of this section, "electronic communication" means the transmission of information by wire, radio, optical cable, electromagnetic, or other similar means. "Electronic communication" includes, but is not limited to, electronic mail, internet based communications, pager service, and electronic text messaging.
Since, in this person's opinion, our local newspaper isn't informed enough to protect our community and citizens, ThurstonBlog will provide a format for information and discussion of this subject
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
IF cyberstalking charges are brought against one or more of the commenter(s) on Olympian comment threads, the paper is going to have to reveal the ID(s) of the commenter(s). Why not be proactive, ban the stalkers now, and prevent future legal action(s) against the paper?
This is my point, 98507. Unfortunately, my faith in the publisher went down quickly. I'm guessing he is but a pawn in the racket of making money off the backs of the readers and to hell with security.
Why else would they have ignored the threats of violence leveled at certain sectors of the community?
It's just too complicated to be a part of the community when you are in Sacramento. Spread a little charity money around and pretend you care.
The differences between how the Olympian reacts and how the Trib reacts are quite striking, aren't they? It's almost as if they don't belong to the same company. I do realize, however, that it boils down to the individual "publishers" and managing editors, and it's apparent that the Trib's crew is head and shoulders above those of the Zero!
They could even institute a real positive ID sign up system if they so desired. Clearly there is no such desire. They'd rather allow those they "ban" to create a new ID and continue on with the same behavior.
Disqus has the capability to ID via IP. The Olympian moderator can spot me a mile away.
They choose to selectively moderate, which sets them up for the lawsuit possibility, as they are demonstrating that they DO, in fact, moderate.
According to their publisher, they don't moderate, but I've proven different.
They remain without liability if they only "respond to complaints", but I now know better.
As to the difference in Tacoma, I think it's just the professionalism of the staff. Radec was banned in Tacoma and tried to come back with another account and was banned in a heartbeat.
Banning by IP is not necessarily effective. I can get my ISP to change my IP with a simple change to my router.
Post a Comment