House Bill 1900

The State House is considering a bill which would make it illegal to purchase the domain name of an official or candidate or political entity.  The law would make this a crime if you had the intent of misleading anyone into believing the website associated with such a name had to do with that person or entity.  The bill came about because of the Schuylkill County controller's race this year when one candidate bought many domain names he thought his opponent might use.

Let's recap a bit here.  The internet has been around for a while now and political websites dot it here and there.  If you're running for office and don't have a website not only are you losing a valuable tool but you appear to be an idiot who's behind the times.  One of the very first things candidates and campaigns do these days is buy their domain names.   Rick Santorum went so far as to buy all possible presidential domain names in case he ran for president in several possible election cycles. 

Any political consultant will advise you not only to buy the obvious name but all similar ones so your opponent doesn't get one and launch an attack site against you.  Think "The Liberal Bob Casey" for example.  Attack websites are as common now as attack ads.  If you fail to buy your domain names you're an idiot who shouldn't be in public office.

So now the state House wants to protect idiots from themselves by trying to legislate this.  First of all the Commonwealth has no jurisdiction over domain names.  Secondly how is the House going to discipline Democrats.com or GeorgeWBush.com when someone objects?   There are hundreds if not thousands, of internet sites that could be prosecuted under this state law but no court in Pennsylvania with jurisdiction.  If a domain name is registered in California or Canada and hosted in some other state or country how the heck do these sponsors think they're going to enforce this law?

This law is a joke and the Representatives who have signed on as co-sponsors are stupid.  What's more the effect of such a law could be interpreted by courts as limiting political free speech, something they tend to strike down immediately (see McCain-Feingold for example).

I notice Traitor Tom Caltagirone's name on this bill and I wonder if he's trying, once again, to force me into giving up the name of my local blog with this law.  There's one solution for that:  I'll begin sifting through the campaign finance reports of all the sponsors of this bill for interesting information.  Cross referencing those contributions to votes can be VERY interesting news for our readers.  Here's the list of sponsors:

GOODMAN, McCALL, BELFANTI, BIANCUCCI, BLACKWELL, BRENNAN, BUXTON, CALTAGIRONE, CARROLL, CASORIO, COHEN, CONKLIN, COSTA, DeLUCA, DePASQUALE, DERMODY, DeWEESE, EACHUS, FABRIZIO, FRANKEL, FREEMAN, GEORGE, GERBER, GERGELY, GIBBONS, GRUCELA, HALUSKA, HANNA, HARHAI, HARHART, HORNAMAN, KING, KORTZ, KOTIK, LEACH, LENTZ, LEVDANSKY, MAHONEY, MANN, MARKOSEK, McGEEHAN, MELIO, MUNDY, OLIVER, PARKER, PETRARCA, PETRONE, PRESTON, RAMALEY, READSHAW, SABATINA, SANTONI, SEIP, SHAPIRO, SIPTROTH, M. SMITH, SOLOBAY, STABACK, STURLA, SURRA, TANGRETTI, WALKO, WANSACZ, WATERS, WHEATLEY, WILLIAMS, WOJNAROSKI, YEWCIC, YOUNGBLOOD, YUDICHAK, J. WHITE, HENNESSEY, QUINN and LONGIETTI.

I wonder if all of these morons own their own names?  If not perhaps that should be their first order of business.  Let's examine the list:

NealGoodman.com:  belongs to Bright Air Productions of Allston, MA.  All the other extensions are available so he hasn't bought his name.

KeithMcCall.com:  belongs to McCall Photography of Columbus, GA.   All other extensions remain available.  He hasn't bought his own name.

RobertBelfanti.com:  Available.  He hasn't bought his own name.

VinceBiancucci.com:  Available.  He hasn't bought his own name.

ThomasBlackwell.com:  Available.  He hasn't bought his own name.

JosephBrennan.com:  Owned by SIMG.  Other extensions are available.

RonBuxton.com:  He actually owns his name!

TomCaltagirone.com:  Privately owned and registered.  Does Traitor Tom, enforcer of all things domain name related, not even own his own name?

MikeCarroll.com:  Registered to a Mike Carroll of Baton Rouge, LA.

JamesCasorio.com:  Available.

MarkCohen.com:  Registered to Mark Cohen Photography.

ScottConklin.com:  Registered to Scott Conklin of 339 Kepp Road, Philipsburg, PA.  Finally, another one who bought his own name.

PaulCosta.com:  Registered to Paul Costa of North Tonawanda, NY.  No match.

TonyDeLuca.com:  Registered to Granjo Music of Ventnor, NJ.  Again, no match.

GeneDePasquale.com:  Available.  So is eugenedepasquale.com.

FrankDermody.com:   Registered to Loren Salsgiver of Freeport, PA.  She owns a hosting company so may own the name on his behalf.  Who knows?

BillDeWeese.com:  registered to Eric Buxton of Mechanicsburg, PA.   Appears to be a consultant, probably to DeWeese.

ToddEachus.com:  Registered to Govercom Strategies, Buxton's company.

FlorindoFabrizio.com:  Available.  You can't tell me there's a rush on for this name.

DanFrankel.com:  Registered to a Dan Frankel living in Europe.

BobFreeman.com:  Registered to DomainDiscover.  No way to know who owns the name.  RobertFreeman.com is owned by a man by that name in Colorado.

BudGeorge.com:  Private registration.  CamilleGeorge.com:  Owned by FinancialPlanning.com.

MikeGerber.com:  Registered privately through ahosting company in Brea, CA.

MarcGergely.com:   Registered to Wan-Fu China, Ltd.  I don't think this is him.

JaretGibbons.com:  Registered to Navigation Catalyst Systems Inc of El Segundo, CA.  Good luck prosecuting them to get your  name. 

RichGrucela.com:    Registered to Buxton's consulting company.

GaryHaluska.com:  Available.

MikeHanna.com:  Registered to ENOM, Inc.  No other information is available.

TedHarhai.com:  Available.

JulieHarhart.com:    Registered to JulieHarhart.com of Vancouver, WA.  Good luck suin gher in Pennsylvania courts for using your name Rep. Harhart!

JohnHornaman.com:  Available.

ChrisKing.com:  Registered to King Cycle Group of Portland, OR.  Good luck forcing them to relinquish your name in a PA court!  They'll laugh all the way back to Oregon.

BillKortz.com:  Registered to William Kortz of Dravosburg, PA.  Bingo, I believe found a hit!

NickKotik.com:  Available.  Who wants to buy a few names?

DaylinLeach.com:  Privately registered.  Impossible to determine who owns the name.

BryanLentz.com:  Registered to Buzz Communications.

DavidLevdansky.com:  Available.  So is davelevdansky.com.

TimMahoney.com:  Registered through a Mr. John Harazin of Minneapolis, MN.  I don't think we have a match.  I hope Harazin has a good lawyer.

JenniferMann.com:  registered to Friends of Jennifer Mann.  Another hit.

JoeMarkosek.com:   Available.  It's a shame we can't even get two in a row.

MikeMcGeehan.com:  Registered through Go Daddy by a Michael McGeehan.  He lives in Marietta, GA.

AnthonyMelio.com:   Available.  So is tonymelio.com.

PhyllisMundy.com:   Registered to Global Infonet of KIngston, PA.  This appears to be another hit.

FrankOliver.com:  Registered to a Frank Oliver of Miami, FL.  Doe she know he's using a politician's name?  Shame on him!

CherelleParker.com:  Available.  Shouldn't these Representatives be taking care of their own business before interfering in ours?

JoePetrarca.com:  Available.  There can't be a whole lot of demand for this one.

TomPetrone.com:  His name is oned by Sierra Cyber of Placerville, CA.  Going to sue someone in California to get your domain name?  Good luck with that.

JoePreston.com:  Registered to a Joe Preston in San Francisco.  Good luck telling him he doesn't have a right to this name because you're a big shot in Pennsylvania.

SeanRamaley.com:  Available.

HarryReadshaw.com:  Available.  For $40 these Democrats could have attended last April's Party sponsored Campaign Camp in Pittsburgh.  I did a training session on websites where I covered the importance of buying all your domain names.  Of course they also could have hired me for consulting.  Now they're SOOL if someone buys their names because this law is unenforceable.

JohnSabatina.com:  Registered to Steven Blumberg of Philadelphia.

DanteSantoni.com:  Available.

TimSeip.com:  Registered to Govercom Consulting.

JoshShapiro.com:  Registered to Josh Shapiro of Clayton, Missouri.

JohnSiptroth.com:  Available.

MatthewSmith.com:  Private registration.  MattSmith.com is owned by Matthew Smith Online Services in the Cayman Islands.  Good luck getting them to comply with a Pennsylvania law Matt.

TimSolobay.com:  Available.

EdStaback.com:  Available, as is EdwardStaback.com.

MikeSturla.com:  Registered to Chris Fenwick of Lancaster.

DanSurra.com:  Available.

TomTangretti.com:  Available.

DonWalko.com:  Registered to Wan-Fu China, Ltd.  through Nassau.  Sure, they're going to be really impressed with your Pennsylvania law.  Who gets to go serve them?

JimWansacz.com:  No match for either Jim or James.

RonWaters.com:  Private registration.  RonaldWaters.com is available.

JakeWheatley.com:  Available.  Someone grab your credit card because a LOT of these names are available.

JewellWilliams.com:  Available.  It only costs $10/year to buy your name you know?  You can't afford that?

EdWojnaroski.com:  Available.

TomYewcic.com:  Available.  I might as well use ditto marks.

RositaYoungblood.com:  Available.

JohnYudichak.com:  Registered through Frank Walsh of Blakely, PA and Integral Technology Solutions.  They probably host his website.

JesseWhite.com:  Registered to Jesse White of Norman, Oklahoma.  Long commute Jesse?

TimHennessey.com:  Registered to Tim Hennessey of Philadelphia.

MargueriteQuinn.com:  Registered to the House Republican Caucus.  Careful she doesn't accuse you of dog napping!

MarkLongietti.com:  Available.

Democrats using GoDaddy.com for their names should be ashamed.  The owner of that firm is a heavy contributor to Republicans.

   

   

Comments

[Ghost of Tom Joad]

You looked up all those names? Damn!! Don't you have anything better to do with your time? ;-)

[Melissa]

Couldn't we sweep up all of those available names and then, come re-election time, offer to sell the domains to the respective candidates at 'reasonable prices'?

I'm detecting a profitable opportunity for the blog here.... ;-)

[John Morgan]

It took four hours.

[DC 93]

I love their pathetic attempt to once again bring down brute force in an area that is clearly public domain and free and open trade.

It goes to show once more that government reform is a joke to these people and they just don't give a rip about Pennsylvania voters, unless you are 100% for their party or ideals.

All the more reason to argue for the elimination of political parties period. However, I do like Melissa's idea and after all, what better way to make Traitor Tom sniff grovel than to buy his other domains and make him have to negotiate with you to get them back.

Give him a taste of the squelching of free speech for the purpose of yanking his chain a bit. Also, if people go and buy up these domains now, the law won't be able to do squat, even if it could. I believe the terms is No Ex-Post Facto Laws.

Personally, though, I really don't give a darn about web domains for names or anything like that, even if I was running for office. I am of the minority opinion that this whole damn web thing has become so overblown and ridiculous that I'd just as soon turn my back on it, entirely. It is another pathetic example of the idiocy that permeates the visceral foundations of society itself.

[Melissa]

"It is another pathetic example of the idiocy that permeates the visceral foundations of society itself."

Geesh, that's incredibly cynical! There's a wealth of information and resources at your fingertips from one convenient medium. I don't see how you can consider that 'idiocy.' Do you care to elaborate?

[dl]

John is opening a fund to purchase those domain names. Any contributors?

Our legislators don't read the constitution. That law would be totally open to constitutional challenge.

When they pass laws to protect themselves, not the public, they inadvertently violate the Constitution. A long, court case which the taxpayers will fund and lose.

I've got a law that was passed to protect Mr. Caltagirone's friend, the perjuring doctor. All done in secret this last year because they know their in trouble. It is a constitutional violation and will get challenged.

There is also a court case against a court rule change, also made in an attempt to override a Consolidated Statute and the Rules of Evidence so the crime scheme could continue protected. Totally challengable too.

The legal criminals are in trouble when the lay person learns the law. Wonder what they are planning next?

There does seem to be a tendency for PA legislators to use their power to protect their behind the scenes, profit-making schemes. Since the newspapers are useless, we need to stop the bloggers from telling the truth.

[DC 93]

Yes, Melissa, I'll elaborate.

No it is not cynical, it is me tired of the foolishness and lengths that some or most people feel they must go to in order to some how "keep up with it all" as if that really matters in the grand scheme of things. Maybe it is the way I've come to see things, maybe it is how others can't seem to see things differently than the rat race, idiocy that life has become, in how we keep acting and reacting, like Lemmings for so many and I am guilty of this too, still to an extent, but I try to do what I can to not give into it, and I live with a lot less stress for it I find.

The idiocy in the case of my earlier comment was directed at John's notion or anybody's that one must basically control their domain names or as many as they can and that it really matters if people decide to take someone's domain name as that is their actual name and use it for whatever purposes to construct a website from it.

Personally, I don't give a damn, I really don't. To me the web is useful for what you say yes, but it is also quite overflowing with a lot of glitzy, idiotic nonsense and really self-aggrandized drivel that ain't worth printing in a Bazooka Joe wrapper let alone to take up server space and to actually pay for it on a yearly or monthly basis to keep it there, but that's peoples' choices and I respect that, but I still think it foolish. We gotten so far away from actual reality that the line between actual and virtual is almost truly gone for all intended purposes. Yet, I feel that there is better meaning and more use to actual reality than virtual and I think those who have to rely on virtual to get by are missing out and just part of the idiotic rat race to nowhere.

I am also tired of the grand idiotic attempts, as part of my earlier comment, to "control the spin" and to "frame the truth" in some way that makes whatever argument or set of arguments or issues that you champion or hate look better or only emphasize the best parts of it. We have turned ourselves into a society of marketing copy-cats and people who only want to see bad things, when we can pin them on whoever we don't like or their politica, or their values, or whatever else peeves us, but rarely do we honestly focus on our own problems and see that the real way to better times is to look to our own individual deportments and then begin to bring together those efforts to make real change.

What I see a lot of and I am most tired of from all sides of the social and political spectrum is just pure bitching and pointing fingers and expecting others to give more of a damn about something than we do individually.

I hope that helped to clarify my earlier comment and give you a bit more light into my world, like it or not.

[LeeLevan]

DC93, While I think you will concede that your comments are seasoned with frustration, I surely will concede that there is truth in what you expressed. The world would be a whole lot better place if we all spent more of our energy improving it and less cricizing others.

And we all would be a whole lot less stressed if we made our lives simpler.

[Melissa]

DC,

Then I believe your gripe is with particular behaviors and not the internet itself. Those behaviors are not limited to the internet, but rather spill over onto the internet.

[DC93]

Actually, it is with both behaviors and the internet, as the internet has helped to foster and empower the behaviors by being a large tool for the cultivation and continuation and communication of the various idiotic notions, mantras, trends, fads, etc. that make up the larger basis of my gripe, as you say.

Though, actually I know I cannot truly blame a physical network, or the servers, harddrives, interframe relays, etc. that make up the internet, but those who helped to advance it technologically, those who help to push it on the world and market all the wonderful things that can be done, without really giving much, if any thought to the consequences of putting such unbridled power and possibility into the hands of people who get hung up over who shot J.R. or what the latest screw up Britney Spears has done lately, etc.

Like education and certain skills one can attain to, there exists the potential for some real danger and some real ugly abuse and exploitation by those who are both motivated to use it in such a way or far too insipent or addictive in their personalities to utilize that tool, skill, or education to simply just "feed" their fixes and support a life of superficiality and other idiotic behaviors.

I'm not saying get rid of the net, but people in large part, I think, won't ever really make the best use of the internet that they could, but simply whatever best uses they want to. While such a manner of using the internet is fine on the surface and seems harmless enough, it helps them avoid the other parts of life and becomes like a warm soft blanket of comfort, wrapped in virtual trim and complete with regular updates and cookies to boot (sorry no milk, in cyberland we only drink Diet Coke *to quote
RENT*). We still have a good many people around the greater Reading Berks area that have wide open, crackable wireless networks with lots of personal sensitive information available for those who fit into my other category of person I mentioned. So, harmless on the surface sure, but where it counts, nope not harmless, but most of them just don't get it. Hell they don't get it when it comes to politics, they don't get it when it comes to social issues, they don't get it when it comes to why it is not ok to just sit and vegge out for the rest of their lives on constant video streaming, or World of Warcraft, or text messaging in some idiotic short-hand, that is cool to a point, but assumes, wrongly, that everyone gets their double-speak and entendres.

We love the bigger, better, faster, quicker to make, easier to reproduce, instantly gratifying stuff that technology brings to the world and our lives, but most of us, do not still realize that with that great power comes great responsibility, and that just because you can have something "On-Demand" (thank you Comcast) that you should.

Again, "Do What Thout Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law", does Not mean do whatever the hell you feel like.

[DC93]

Lee, yes, exactly, and for sake of compromise, yes I concede that certainly my comments are peppered in frustration with realizing how much we are missing the good stuff and how few see it, but how much I cannot simply wave a wand and make everyone see it or even more, choose it.

Each for their own.