4 ms·
So what is the "specific law or legal authority" that makes it illegal?
by strictnein 9y ago
So what is the "specific law or legal authority" that makes it illegal?
- pdonis 9y agoSo if it's not against the letter of the law, that makes it ok?
- geodel 9y agoI imagine so, as that point it would be a matter of taste.
- strictnein 9y agoWhen did I claim that?
- dominotw 9y agoYes. Thats the basis of legal system.
- blfr 9y agoI would say that submitting a public comment under a pseudonym is OK even if it was against the law.
- vec 9y agoMaybe it is, maybe it isn't, but that's not actually the issue in question. The comments to the FCC board were made using (publicly available) real name and address pairs. Someone submitted a comment using my legal name and current address. Whether that person should have been able to comment pseudonymously or not is beside the point. What they actually did is make a public statement in my name, which may or may not reflect my actual views, and which definitely impedes my ability to express those actual views if and when I desire to.
- nkw 9y ago18 U.S.C. § 1001 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001
- nkw 9y agoUnless you were asking for the state law which would be http://codes.findlaw.com/ny/penal-law/pen-sect-190-25.html http://codes.findlaw.com/ny/penal-law/pen-sect-190-25.html
- strictnein 9y agoHas this law ever been applied to public comments on a matter before a government agency?
- nkw 9y agoOff the top of my head I don't know. Is the existence of a prior prosecution based on identical or substantially similar facts a condition precedent for a statute to be violated?
- strictnein 9y agoThe reason I'm asking is that, IANAL, but I doubt that law was intended to cover something like this. So I'm simply wondering if it had been applied in a similar way in the past, because that would be the best indicator of whether or not it was applicable.
- nkw 9y agoIt is an enormously broad statute. Many would say too much so. This article[1] advocates that it is too broad, but provides some useful examples of how it has been interpreted and applied. Whether or not it was intended to cover something like this is not really relevant as to whether or not the statute was violated. I think what you might be getting at is the question of whether or not the statute is unconstitutionally vague, which is a pretty good argument, but has been mostly rejected by the courts. [1] https://repository.jmls.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1069&context=lawreview https://repository.jmls.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=http...