Assemb. Murray.

Cue the walkback. New York State Assemblyman Dean Murray just blasted out a statement regarding his proposal to require publishers to remove anonymous comments on the Internet upon request. "Unfortunately, some opponents of this legislation have mischaracterized this bill in an attempt to have it withdrawn," he said. "It has been stated that this legislation would ban all anonymous internet postings in New York. That could not be further from the truth."

The story that hit the Internet earlier this week—New York legislators want to ban anonymous commenting!—was slightly oversimplified. Assemb. Murray wants to give victims of cyberbullying a way to confront their detractors or remove nasty things from showing up in their Google results. Assemb. Murray was himself the victim of anonymous commenters who spread rumors that he was abusing his ex-wife and son. Assemb. Murray pointed out that extreme cyberbullying has been linked to teen suicide.

Unfortunately, like many lawmakers, Assemb. Murray and his co-sponsor in the State Senate, Tom O'Mara, don't completely grasp the way the Internet works. Rebloggers and retweeters decided the bill amounted to a quash on free speech, as anyone could request a takedown. (In the debate, no one mentioned that the rule would place a potentially heavy burden on online publishers—what are we, chopped liver?)

The words "anonymous comment ban" richocheted around Twitter and Reddit as the Interneterati tore the lawmakers apart, causing eyebrows to raise, eyes to roll, and, apparently, inspiring more than a few constituents to pick up the phone.

Assemb. Murray's full statement clarifying the bill and promising it will be refined:

Over the past few days, there has been a healthy and productive discussion regarding the “Internet Protection Act,” legislation I sponsored to protect victims from libelous and defamatory remarks by anonymous posters.

Countless people have contacted me in support of this anti-bullying measure, with suggestions to improve and strengthen it.

One such change that is being considered is to tighten up the language to clarify exactly who can challenge a statement and under what circumstances that request can be made to the administrator. The intent of the bill is to focus on protecting those being targeted by malicious and false statements, but would only apply to factual concerns, not opinions. This requirement to attach your name to a statement would only apply if the statement is challenged and it can only be challenged based on factual information not opinion. It is the victim, or target of the statement that has to reach out to the administrator.

In the coming weeks, I am hoping to meet with internet providers, web site owners and others in the on-line community to work together on this legislation, and refine it to offer better protection to victims of cyber bullying and other crimes.

The First Amendment is one of our most important rights as Americans, and this bill ensures the protection of that right for those who wish to post opinions and truthful information anonymously. Unfortunately, some opponents of this legislation have mischaracterized this bill in an attempt to have it withdrawn. It has been stated that this legislation would ban all anonymous internet postings in New York. That could not be further from the truth.

When anonymous posters hide behind the internet to commit a crime (such as harassment) or as a vehicle for defamation, innocent men, women and children are openly victimized, and the public is intentionally misled.

This legislation merely asks those making their allegations to attach their name to their comments and claim responsibility, just as journalists and those writing letters to the editor of newspapers do.

I look forward to working with a broad spectrum of groups to improve and strengthen this legislation.

(Image: flickr.com/jbcurio)

New York legislators involved with the proposed Internet Protection Act are getting a lot of calls today, and they're not quite sure why. The bill was introduced weeks ago to a quiet reception but seems to have become controversial overnight.

"Assemblyman Jim Conte is just a co-sponsor on the bill," an exasperated aide answered when Betabeat called for a quote about the proposed law, which would require online publishers to remove anonymous comments upon request. "I don't know why today's the day, but today's the day that everyone is calling on this," Republican Tom O'Mara, who introduced the bill in the senate, told Betabeat. "Something was posted somewhere, I guess."

It must have been that Wired story; or maybe it was the pickup on Slashdot. But the proposed legislation, "in relation to protecting a person's right to know who is behind an anonymous internet posting," has provoked chagrin, to say the least, in the blogosphere.

Critics say the bill constitutes censorship and an undue burden on publishers' backs. Proponents say it will combat against cyberbullying like the abuse that allegedly led to Long Island's Alexis Pilkington's suicide.

The bill originated with Assemblyman Dean Murray, who has some experience with anonymous online commenters himself. Faceless detractors used the web in 2010 to spread rumors that Assemb. Murray was guilty of domestic violence against his ex-wife and son.

"The thing that disturbed me the most about it was, once everything was proven false, there was no way to get the comments down," Assemb. Murray said. "The important thing here is to give the victims a voice and an opportunity to protect themselves."

Assemb. Murray.

Under the bill, publishers would be required to dedicate a phone number or email address to receiving complaints about comments. If someone who is directly harmed by the comment challenges a comment, the publisher must take action. The bill as it's written now would require publishers to either collect, verify and publish contact information for the commenter in question—or else remove the comment.

It's similar to the policy many newspapers have for letters to the editor, he said. The legislation would also protect small businesses from anonymous reviews, he said.

"I'm hoping that we can have the governor join on board. He announced this week that he wants to crack down on cyberbullying," Assemb. Murray said. "This does not infringe on anyone's first amendment rights."

Over in the state senate, his  counterpart wasn't so sure. Sen. O'Mara said the initial reaction to the bill was positive and seemed taken aback to discover today that some constituents consider the proposal a violation of free speech.

"Obviously this presses upon the basic foundation of our Constitution and whether this will comport with that or not is something that we're going to be evaluating," he said. "Obviously we're not going to look to move forward with legislation that's in violation of the first amendment."

Had Sen. O'Mara heard of any instances of cyberbullying in his district? "Just anecdotally, I guess," he said. "I don't have any specific things that come off the top of my head now, just complaints about comments that are posted that are baseless, that are false, and are troublesome to say the least."