Re: Re: Cyberbullying verdict turns rule-breakers into cri...

[Guest guest]

Its not so much "rules" as it is "legalism." Legalism is when someone or the system is bogged down in the minutia and details of the law to the point of paralysis. It is also concerned strictly with the letter of the law rather than the spirit of it. So, unless there is a law specifically against a given action, then it is not illegal from the legalistic point of view. This is how so many bad people get away with doing bad things.

Take digital images of child pornography. Because of some court cases, including suits against sensible definitions of what these images were, the legal definition can actually allow slightly digitally altered images or "artistic" images to be legal. On the other hand, parents have been arrested and tried for having pictures of their own children taking baths, the kind any parent might take for the family album, to embarrass the poor sod when they were teenagers.

Some laws have extremely tortured lists and definitions that saw a lot but in the end mean nothing since their very legalese leaves loopholes that a smart lawyer can use to get their client out of the charges. That just means a new law with even more tortured legalese and new loopholes.

So, while the woman in this case would have been charged under any number of laws that applied to real world harassment, because it happened on the internet, somehow that makes it totally different from harassing letters, phone calls or getting right in their face. It isn't. Bullying is bullying, plain and simple. The real world statutes should have sufficed, but legalism got in the way.

In a message dated 12/6/2008 12:45:10 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, no_reply writes:

Another problem with society I guess and social rules. AdministratorMake your life easier with all your friends, email, and favorite sites in one place. Try it now.

[Guest guest]

That did originate with the anti-federalists, although in some areas the law is applied rather loosely. For example, copyright law gets really tortured when backup program installation disks are created, although I have never heard of anyone being arrested for that. Another very strange example is that if I were to leave the country and return with my laptop with encryption installed, I would have committed the felony of unauthorized export of munitions- go figure. Also, the TSA feels it necessary to fine an airline because one of their inspectors managed to gain access to an aircraft by standing on a pitot tube and breaking it, placing the aircraft out of service.