Having read the admittedly vague and badly worded statute, I bet you that an competent court (query whether this includes the first state prosecutor and trial court that actually are faced with a case) would interpret the act to apply only to cases where someone infringes on the intellectual property of another. If only to avoid constitutional problems. Although as a formal matter EFF are right that the bill's language *could* be read to apply to all anonymous communication, I don't think EFF has done us a favor by whipping up panic, because it seems to me relatively unlikely that it *should* or *would* be read that way. Oh well. A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin@law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's warm here.