This is an honest question that I realize will seem very tin-foil hatty, but I can't seem to brush it off.
Does anyone ever worry that doing something like this (supplying your name, email, etc.) will come back to bite you later? Say, in 15 years if the American government by some twist outlaws decent. Does anyone worry that you might be persecuted?
If things ever get to the point where the US Government is actively rounding up people for having their name on a list because they oppose "Protect IP", I like to think I will be too busy actively revolting to worry about my name being on this list.
That would be an example of an ex post facto law — punishing behavior that occurred before such behavior was made criminal — the creation of which is explicitly forbidden to the Congress in Article 1, Section 9 (and to the States in Section 10) of the US Constitution.
That's not to say your name wouldn't end up on a list of people who should be watched for further seditious behavior or something, but I'm pretty sure that kind of thing already happens, and has been for a very long time, anyway.
I think the possibility that OP is worried about (making dissent illegal) is probably at least as radical as overturning the clause against ex post facto law (both would require Constitutional amendment AFAIK). So given the level of paranoia required to worry about the possibility that free speech will be gone in the US, the constitutional ban on ex post facto laws isn't really responsive.
I suspect it would be much, much easier to convince Americans to give up the ex post facto protections than the first amendment. This can simply be done by focusing anger at a series of high profile scummy but completely legal actions, and a proper amount of demagoguery against the "damn liberals and their ex post facto bullshit". Once that goes, the rest is easy to deal with.
This can simply be done by focusing anger at a series of high profile scummy but completely legal actions, and a proper amount of demagoguery against the "damn liberals and their ex post facto bullshit".
You could probably start with the MySpace bullying case. Add in some Wall Street bankers for good measure.
Further, retroactive punishment (in the form of harassment, being put on watch lists or no-fly lists, etc.) can still occur even in the absence of any specific ex post facto law.
Finally, with the retroactive extensions granted to copyright holders, the potential for this has already happened -- publishers have released new editions out-of-copyright works, only to find those works later placed back under copyright protection.
No. So many people have signed so many petitions, and the people who organize the petition drivers are often tricky, so the average person isn't quite sure what they signed up for. And many people sign petitions because their friends (or a hot girl outside the grocery store, or..) asked them to.
I would only worry if I planned to run for public office, and didn't plan to stand by my current beliefs.
Organizing an effort like this, yes. But mostly because it shows that you are an activist and can make things happen when you don't like the status quo. And I think the benefits of developing that reputation outweigh the drawbacks.
Thanks. All the answers have been helpful, this one is perhaps the most pragmatic. I've signed as well, I suppose it wouldn't really matter in any case, as if the US was headed down that path I think I'd just jump ship.
1: Any time I go through a border I have the expectation that an immigration officer (from any country) has access to my online activity. This could be a quick google search, but more likely I've been run through an automatic system to detect any red flags prior to arrival. A future government may see your actions now as 'unpatriotic'.
2: When we are not in our native countries (and even then) our rights are essentially 100% in the hands of the immigration officers whilst at a border. Read those immigration cards sometime.
3: In any country a Law Enforcement Officer can google you and can also use a 3rd party summary service to find out about you. So you you get arrested then anything you have online is available to be used as evidence against you.
4: When the rule of law applies, and decent people are enforcing the law, then none of this matters if you behave in a legal manner, even if you are fully exercising your right to free speech. However LEOs like the rest of us are human and have bias. So expect the worst at times. As we have seen recently a few bad actors can bring an entire force, state or even country into disrepute.
5: We should have the expectation that anything put into a computer, certainly written online or even said in a call can and probably is being captured. It's one of trillions of data points and ignored, but if you ever become famous, infamous or under suspicion then the data is there.
No. I'm proud to affix my name in opposition to SOPA, if descent is outlawed my opposition to this bill will be the least of my problems, because I'll oppose that law with every once of devotion I can bring to bear.
Does anyone ever worry that doing something like this (supplying your name, email, etc.) will come back to bite you later? Say, in 15 years if the American government by some twist outlaws decent. Does anyone worry that you might be persecuted?