Federal Court Rejects Child Online Protection Act
Robert Paul Reyes
March 26, 2007
From The Center For Democracy And Technology Web Site:
"In a major victory for free speech online, the federal District Court in Philadelphia on March 22 issued a sweeping rejection of the Child Online Protection Act (COPA), and a broad endorsement of the 'user empowerment' approach to protecting children online. After a four-week long trial in the long-running ACLU v. Gonzales litigation, the court held that COPA would not be effective at protecting kids, and that filtering technology represents a "less restrictive" and more constitutional alternative to the goal of online safety."
On the Information Highway there are stops where you can listen to sermons by Jerry Fawell and James Dobson and rest stations where you can view pornography, and that's the way it should be. We should resist all attempts to censor content on the World Wide Web. With the exception of child pornography, which is a crime -- anything goes.
The Internet has empowered regular citizens; we can go online and post a blog or post a video to express our religious and political views. We should strenuously resist all attempts to curtail our freedom of speech online.
Some parents are too lazy or too stupid to figure out how to install filters for their children's computers, they expect Big Brother to do the censoring for them.
I know a couple who bought a laptop for their 11-year-old son and then they were "shocked, shocked, shocked" to discover that he was viewing hardcore pornography. Small children should not have their own computers, they should use a computer in a family room where parents can peer over their shoulders to check out what they are doing online.
From The Center For Democracy And Technology Web site:
"Congress passed COPA in 1998, shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court voided the unconstitutional Communications Decency Act (CDA). COPA was immediately blocked from taking effect by a court injunction. COPA would make it a crime for anyone to make any Web communication for commercial purposes that is 'harmful to minors' unless the person has used technological means to prevent access by minors (such as requiring credit card verification)."
Under the "harmful to minors" provision, the government could censor erotic Web sites, forums on discussing safe sex and just about anything with a sexual, not necessarily pornographic , content.
I think I'm going to celebrate the court's ruling by looking up a few images of a Jenna Jameson...
"In a major victory for free speech online, the federal District Court in Philadelphia on March 22 issued a sweeping rejection of the Child Online Protection Act (COPA), and a broad endorsement of the 'user empowerment' approach to protecting children online. After a four-week long trial in the long-running ACLU v. Gonzales litigation, the court held that COPA would not be effective at protecting kids, and that filtering technology represents a "less restrictive" and more constitutional alternative to the goal of online safety."
On the Information Highway there are stops where you can listen to sermons by Jerry Fawell and James Dobson and rest stations where you can view pornography, and that's the way it should be. We should resist all attempts to censor content on the World Wide Web. With the exception of child pornography, which is a crime -- anything goes.
The Internet has empowered regular citizens; we can go online and post a blog or post a video to express our religious and political views. We should strenuously resist all attempts to curtail our freedom of speech online.
Some parents are too lazy or too stupid to figure out how to install filters for their children's computers, they expect Big Brother to do the censoring for them.
I know a couple who bought a laptop for their 11-year-old son and then they were "shocked, shocked, shocked" to discover that he was viewing hardcore pornography. Small children should not have their own computers, they should use a computer in a family room where parents can peer over their shoulders to check out what they are doing online.
From The Center For Democracy And Technology Web site:
"Congress passed COPA in 1998, shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court voided the unconstitutional Communications Decency Act (CDA). COPA was immediately blocked from taking effect by a court injunction. COPA would make it a crime for anyone to make any Web communication for commercial purposes that is 'harmful to minors' unless the person has used technological means to prevent access by minors (such as requiring credit card verification)."
Under the "harmful to minors" provision, the government could censor erotic Web sites, forums on discussing safe sex and just about anything with a sexual, not necessarily pornographic , content.
I think I'm going to celebrate the court's ruling by looking up a few images of a Jenna Jameson...
Print
Email
