U.S. Judge Blocks 1998 Online Porn Law
By MARYCLAIRE DALE
The Associated Press
Thursday, March 22, 2007; 9:59 AM
PHILADELPHIA -- A federal judge on Thursday dealt another blow to government efforts to control Internet pornography, striking down a 1998 U.S. law that makes it a crime for commercial Web site operators to let children access "harmful" material.
In the ruling, the judge said parents can protect their children through software filters and other less restrictive means that do not limit the rights of others to free speech.
"Perhaps we do the minors of this country harm if First Amendment protections, which they will with age inherit fully, are chipped away in the name of their protection," wrote Senior U.S. District Judge Lowell Reed Jr., who presided over a four-week trial last fall.
The law would have criminalized Web sites that allow children to access material deemed "harmful to minors" by "contemporary community standards." The sites would have been expected to require a credit card number or other proof of age. Penalties included a $50,000 fine and up to six months in prison.
Sexual health sites, the online magazine Salon.com and other Web sites backed by the American Civil Liberties Union challenged the law. They argued that the Child Online Protection Act was unconstitutionally vague and would have had a chilling effect on speech. Chilling effect?
What is "chilling" is the indifference of such "free speech advocates" as Salon.com and the ACLU to the reality of the now further increased ease of access for children to such a dehumanizing, desensitizing and corruptive poison.
 pornography, fleshploitation>Labels: pornography |
