Eric Schiller
CS320 Summary Response

From http://michael.landier.com/essays/censorship

A very interesting essay criticizing censorship of the Internet is "Internet Censorship is Absurd and Unconstitutional", by Michael Landier. It deals with the recent attempts to censor various facets of the global network, especially the Communications Decency Act (CDA), which Congress passed in 1996. The author offers not only his opinion, but a broad summary of the related events, as well as a few alternatives to censorship.

According to the author, both sides of the censorship debate base their views on how they view the Internet. Supporters of Internet censorship would like to create laws like those the FCC enforces on television and radio. This type of regulation was written into the CDA. Most opponents say that the Internet is nothing like a television, and should be treated differently. They believe that the Internet is unprecedented, and any regulation should be treated very carefully.

The first widespread call for Internet censorship came in 1995, when an anti- pornography group helped introduce a bill called The Protection of Children from Computer Pornography Act of 1995. Although the bill failed, it was an important point. One year later, the same group helped author the CDA, which became a part of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. When the act passed, it caused the ACLU and many other groups to challenge it as breaking the First Amendment. The CDA was eventually decided to be unconstitutional, as it violated the First and Fifth Amendments, and overturned by the Supreme Court. During this precendent setting case, one of the biggest problems came with each individual judge had their own analogies for the Internet, which were not all accurate.

The Internet, as Michael Landier suggests, can fit into our current set of laws with no problem. Many existing pornography laws have been used to prosecute Internet cases. New laws would be unenforceable, as they would only apply in the U.S., while servers could be anywhere worldwide. He suggests that Internet publishers should be treated like print publishers, who are protected under the First Amendment. ISP's would then be treated only as carriers of data, like telephone companies, and therefore not responsible for anything they carry. The only regulation, in the author's opinion, should come from the users. Parents can stop their children from visiting certain sights by using several programs, including Net Nanny and Cybersitter. Many proponents of censorship even support these voluntary efforts.