As usual this could be a good law, but it is so poorly written that it can be used for anything. The stated intent of the law is to criminalize the act of following someone around online and continually harassing them. Which I personally view as a form of stalking that should be criminal, there is a huge difference between saying your piece and continually harassing a person via a communications medium. One is an exercise in the free speech the other is the victimization of a person. As a rule of thumb a persons rights ends when it victimizes another person.

The problem with this law and many others like it is that they do not codify at what point does it stop being speech and begin being harassment, they do this to give law enforcement leeway but it is leeway that they neither need, nor have they shown any responsibility in utilizing. If they are going to write these laws the need to codify at which point one steps past the law. Is a person that rebuts another person on Facebook every time they post in violations of it, if they add a nasty comment at the end? how many infractions have to happen before it crosses the line? As it sits now, it looks like it could be as little as two. The should have a provision that it has to be unprovoked as well, we have all seen flamefest in which one party would love to be able to have the other party arrested, but they reality is they are just as guilty.

The authors of the bill know very well that it won't pass constitutional muster. That's exactly the point; this is akin to the door-in-the-face technique. Parts of the bill will be struck down, but parts will remain and the envelope will be pushed. Thus, the war on freedom and on speech will continue to be won by our governments.