This post is illegal.
From title 47, chapter 5, subchapter II, part 1, as amended by HR 3402 Sec. 113.
§ 223. Obscene or harassing telephone calls in the District of Columbia or in interstate or foreign communications
(a) Prohibited acts generally
Whoever—(1) in interstate or foreign communications—
(C) makes a telephone call or utilizes a telecommunications device, whether or not conversation or communication ensues, without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person at the called number or who receives the communications;
(h) Definitions
For purposes of this section—(1) The use of the term “telecommunications device” in this section—(A) shall not impose new obligations on broadcasting station licensees and cable operators covered by obscenity and indecency provisions elsewhere in this chapter;
(B) does not include an interactive computer service;
(C) in the case of subparagraph (C) of subsection (a)(1), includes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet (as such term is defined in section 1104 of the Internet Tax Freedom Act (47 U.S.C. 151 note)).'.
So, if I claim that the revised part of 47.5.II.1 is an attempt at showboating, and that Arlen Specter, et al, are scumsucking idiots for wedging it into the law, that could possibly annoy some member of the Evil Party, and thus (tah dah) it's a crime because I don't sign my posts with the name on my papers?
Given that annoying people is one of the top 10 reasons for using the net (the #1 reason is, of course, porn), this revision to title 47 is likely to have annoying consequences of its own, in the form of flocks of SLAPP's flying majestically against the moonlit sky.
(via Declan McCullagh)