Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    VPJunkie is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    December 1969
    Posts
    21,916
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Court Tosses Internet Porn Law

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in642653.shtml

    PHILADELPHIA, Sept. 10, 2004

    (CBS/AP) A federal judge threw out on Friday a Pennsylvania law requiring Internet service providers to block Web sites containing child pornography, saying the law was unconstitutional and cannot be enforced.

    Enacted in 2002, the law gave Pennsylvania's attorney general the power to require that companies like America Online Inc. block customers from viewing Web sites that had been identified by the state as containing illegal content.

    No one challenged the state's right to stop the distribution of child porn, which is already illegal under federal law, but lawyers for the Center for Democracy and Technology and the American Civil Liberties Union had argued that the technology used to block those Web sites was clumsy.

    Over two years, the groups said, ISPs trying to obey blocking orders were forced to cut access to at least 1.5 million legal Web sites that had nothing to do with child pornography, but were part of the same Internet cluster as the offending sites.

    Lawyers for the state said the technology exists for ISPs to block selectively and blamed Internet companies for not wanting to upgrade their systems.

    U.S. District Judge Jan E. DuBois disagreed, saying current state of technology meant the law "cannot be implemented without excessive blocking of innocent speech in violation of the First Amendment."

    In June, the U.S. Supreme Court made a similar ruling on a federal indecency law.

    The high court divided 5-to-4 over a law passed in 1998, signed by then-President Clinton and later backed by the Bush administration. The majority said a lower court was correct to block the law from taking effect because it likely violates the First Amendment.

    The court did not end the long fight over the law, however ( http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in603528.shtml ). The majority sent the case back to a lower court for a trial that could give the government a chance to prove the law does not go too far. That decision will hinge on whether technology exists that can block obscene material without limiting access to other Web sites.

    The law, which never took effect, would have authorized fines up to $50,000 for the crime of placing material that is "harmful to minors" within the easy reach of children on the Internet.

    İMMIV, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

  2. #2
    Amateur's Avatar
    Amateur is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    December 2001
    Posts
    3,771
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    34
    Thanked 145 Times in 86 Posts

    Default

    Ya know, at some point parents have to be "parents", and take on the responsibility of rearing their own children. No one wants ppl coming into their homes and micro-managing what they do there, so they have to accept that responsibility themselves.

    Otherwise these laws are going to keep popping up, wanting to regulate every facet and decision in a person's daily life. It's crazy, really.
    Amateur
    "Lifting as we climb" - NACWC
    "...the universe has no edge and no center..."
    "If you can't be a good example, you'll just have to be a horrible warning" - Jennifer Crusie
    "Common Sense is not so common." - Voltaire
    TheAPage.com

  3. #3
    FictionNet is offline Closed by Request
    Join Date
    December 1969
    Posts
    5,265
    Thanks
    1,437
    Thanked 1,252 Times in 653 Posts

    Default

    Just wondering if 'tosses' has the same meaning as over here

  4. #4
    Simmo! is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    July 2004
    Posts
    893
    Thanks
    239
    Thanked 406 Times in 226 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FictionNet
    Just wondering if 'tosses' has the same meaning as over here
    I just came in to the thread about to ask the same.

    But as i'm here - although any action that prevents this sort of thing should be applauded, i agree with Amateur to an extent. ISP's have enough to worry about without having to check every page of every site they host IMHO. On the other hand, if the state (or anyone for that matter) notifies them they are hosting a site of this nature, then they have at least a moral obligation to block it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Amateur
    Otherwise these laws are going to keep popping up, wanting to regulate every facet and decision in a person's daily life. It's crazy, really.
    From the outside looking in (and thus a little ignorant in all probability), it appears to me that US laws on gambling show a rather communist tendency already so yes, the less of these laws the better for US citizens. You can carry guns but you can't gamble?? I don't get it.

  5. #5
    VPJunkie is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    December 1969
    Posts
    21,916
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    How true is that?!?!

    What does "tossed" mean there? Here it means "thrown out".

  6. #6
    Ace Fun's Avatar
    Ace Fun is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    England
    Posts
    373
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 17 Times in 16 Posts

    Default

    You have to sit back and think about what is going on here. Children viewing porn and porn containing children are two totally different things. They need different approaches to stop them. There is an adult content filter meta tag, and parents could put a simple block on any page containing this tag. You must question the attitude of the parents that don't do this.

    Regarding child abuse - the ill thought and stupid laws like 2257 hit at responsible web masters, and leave the criminals untouched. It also drives the control of illegal sites outside the american sphere of influence. If you actually want to catch the abusers of children rather than strut around making political gestures, you should keep control over the sites and monitor access and payments made via the site links.

  7. #7
    Pam712's Avatar
    Pam712 is offline Assistant Manager
    Join Date
    February 2002
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,437
    Thanks
    42
    Thanked 42 Times in 24 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SlyCin56
    How true is that?!?!

    What does "tossed" mean there? Here it means "thrown out".
    Oh the language gap Here it is slang for male masturbation

  8. #8
    universal4's Avatar
    universal4 is offline Forum Administrator
    Join Date
    July 2003
    Location
    Courage is being scared to death...and saddling up anyway. John Wayne
    Posts
    28,138
    Thanks
    2,260
    Thanked 7,954 Times in 5,018 Posts

    Default

    Thanks Pam

    I am no longer allowed to post in this particular thread.



    Rick
    Universal4
    Gambling World Online Roulette Online Blackjack Live Online Games Sports Betting Horse Racing
    Casino Affiliate Programs
    Hosting and Domain Names
    Gambling Industry Association
    GPWA Moderation by Me and My Big Bad Security Self
    If an affiliate program is not small affiliate friendly (especially small US Affiliate), then they are NOT Affiliate Friendly!

  9. #9
    VPJunkie is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    December 1969
    Posts
    21,916
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pam712
    Oh the language gap Here it is slang for male masturbation

  10. #10
    chalkoutline's Avatar
    chalkoutline is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    June 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,107
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 77 Times in 70 Posts

  11. #11
    Ace Fun's Avatar
    Ace Fun is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    England
    Posts
    373
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 17 Times in 16 Posts

    Default

    I've also seen it used on a couple of occasions for people that write unrealistic terms of service. I'm not sure if it's intended as a job description, or an ability description.

  12. #12
    m
    m is offline New Member
    Join Date
    August 2004
    Posts
    4
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    If this gets 'tossed' because it violates the First Amendment then surely the same will happen with Casino Citys case.

  13. #13
    VPJunkie is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    December 1969
    Posts
    21,916
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Yep - that's the point of posting this.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •