In Victory for Online Free Speech

[brneyedgrl80]

I gotta hear what you guys think of this.


In Victory for Online Free Speech, Supreme Court Upholds Block on Internet Censorship Law

June 29, 2004

Justices Call Criminal Restrictions on Speech "A Repressive Force in the Lives and Thoughts of a Free People"

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

NEW YORK - Recognizing the severe consequences of criminalizing online free speech, the Supreme Court today upheld a ban on yet another government attempt to censor the Internet, saying that content-based prohibitions of speech "have the constant potential to be a repressive force in the lives and thoughts of a free people."

At issue was the Child Online Protection Act, which imposed draconian criminal sanctions, with penalties of up to $50,000 per day and up to six months imprisonment, for online material acknowledged as valuable for adults but judged "harmful to minors."

"Today’s ruling from the Court demonstrates that there are many less restrictive ways to protect children without sacrificing communication intended for adults," said ACLU Associate Legal Director Ann Beeson, who argued the case before the Justices last March and earlier in 2001.

"By preventing Attorney General Ashcroft from enforcing this questionable federal law, the Court has made it safe for artists, sex educators, and web publishers to communicate with adults about sexuality without risking jail time."

The speech that was criminalized under the law included sexual advice and education, web-based chat rooms and discussion boards involving sexual topics, and websites for bookstores, art galleries and the news media.

Read more here: http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=16025&c=252

 

[Annie]

They should not censor the internet. Period....

It's the parents job to monitor their children, invest the $ to have the types of filters they want their kids to have, if they are to lazy to watch where their children are going.

I wouldn't just tell elementary school aged kids to 'go play', without giving them parameters and checking up on them once in a while.

 

[insein]

"Today’s ruling from the Court demonstrates that there are many less restrictive ways to protect children without sacrificing communication intended for adults," said ACLU Associate Legal Director Ann Beeson, who argued the case before the Justices last March and earlier in 2001.

So why the hell can't that tell the FCC this? Radio restrictions are a freaking joke. Then they pretty much let TV get away with everything. I guarantee if they spent more money on educating people on what a V-chip is and how to use it, they'd be way ahead of the game. I couldn't believe how many people didn't know what a V-Chip was when i worked at Best Buy.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

 

[5stringJeff]

If I ruled the world (great thought) all porn sites would be REQUIRED to have a domain ending in .xxx (i.e. www.penthouse.xxx). Any website with porn that didn't have such an extension would face a hefty fine... say $250,000 per day. That way the porn is out there for those who want it, but easily blocked.

 

[HGROKIT]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
If I ruled the world (great thought) all porn sites would be REQUIRED to have a domain ending in .xxx (i.e. www.penthouse.xxx). Any website with porn that didn't have such an extension would face a hefty fine... say $250,000 per day. That way the porn is out there for those who want it, but easily blocked.

Now that is an excellent idea!

 

[Hobbit]

I'm glad for this decision, but why can't the Supreme Court move on more pressing limitations of free speech and property rights. The DMCA has been nothing but a hassle since it passed in 1998 (thanks a bundle, Willy). It outlaws any technology that gets around copy protection features, meaning you can't make legitamite backups of your media, nor can you circumvent things like regional coding and built-in ads. This provision was designed to outlaw cable "black boxes," but so far, all it's been used for is to limit the freedoms of legitamite citizens.

I mean, some CDs are designed to not be played in computers, and if you figure out a way to make it play anyway, you can be slapped with thousands of dollars in fines.

Also, you can now go down to a federal clerk with nothing but an IP, and instantly, you can get a name, address, and phone number. You don't even need to prove you own a copyright.

I'm glad the Supreme Court is finally catching up with the times, but they really need to get on the stick. I'll still never forgive them for ruling in favor of Bill Gates in Apple vs. Microsoft.

 

[5stringJeff]

Another question... how is porn free speech, but saying "Vote for George Bush" 60 days prior to an election NOT free speech???

:finger: for you, John McCain. :fu2: