Legend
¤  Home
¤  PaulzyBlog
¤  Photillium Media Gallery
¤  .netBoard! Forum Index
¤  View posts since last visit
¤  View your posts
¤  View unanswered posts
.netBoard!

Home|Blog|Gallery
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
 
Judge to rule on landmark Internet porn law

Post new topic   Reply to topic    .netBoard! Forum Index -> Politics and Religion View previous topic :: View next topic  
Judge to rule on landmark Internet porn law
Author Message
paulzy
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Posts: 290
Location: Los Angeles, CA

PostPosted: Nov 20, 2006 2:55 pm    Post subject: Judge to rule on landmark Internet porn law Reply with quote
 
Our beloved Government is once again trying to turn this nation into a Slave State where it's "citizens" have no rights under any law. And it always seems to use our children as a means of doing it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061120/tc_nm/media_pornography_dc_1

If the above link is dead here is the text.


Quote:


By Jon Hurdle 28 minutes ago

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - A U.S. law designed to prevent children from viewing pornography online would undermine the free speech of millions of adult Internet users, opponents of the measure said on Monday.
ADVERTISEMENT

The law is so imprecisely written it would restrict most adult Internet users to material that is only suitable for children, lawyers for the
American Civil Liberties Union and other plaintiffs said in closing arguments of a four-week trial.

The ACLU and others sued the U.S. government, claiming the Child Online Protection Act of 1998 violates the Constitution, and they argued on Monday that filtering was a more effective tool that does not curtail free speech.

But attorneys for the U.S. government called the law necessary to protect young people from sexually explicit material and said Internet filtering technology was not good enough to block offending Web sites from personal computers.

"Evidence shows that many parents do not actively use the filters," said Joel McElvain, an attorney for the U.S. Justice Department.

Judge Lowell Reed of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania is expected to rule in spring 2007, and lawyers said the ruling was likely to be appealed because the case is seen as an important test of free speech limits on the Internet.

Among those suing are Nerve.com, an online magazine about sexual literature, art and politics that claims 1 million readers a month, and Urban Dictionary, an online dictionary of contemporary slang with 40 million readers.

The law, known as COPA, could force them to stop publishing, ACLU attorney Chris Hansen said.

"That's an awful lot of speech that would be chilled by COPA going into effect," Hansen said.

The law has never been implemented because it was challenged in court immediately after its signing by former President
Bill Clinton.

It was held to be unconstitutional by federal district and appeals courts. The
U.S. Supreme Court allowed an injunction against enforcement to stand, and referred the case back to the Pennsylvania court for a full trial.

The law would impose a maximum fine of $50,000 a day and up to six months in prison for anyone who uses the Internet to "make any communication for commercial purposes that is available to any minor and that includes any material that is harmful to minors."



What's shocking is this part: "The law has never been implemented because it was challenged in court immediately after its signing by former President
Bill Clinton.
" He actually fell for this nonsense. I'm ALL for protecting children. But, not at the expense of taking rights away from adults. Let the laws refect on the Parents who don't protect thier children from harm. Hold them accountable. Leave the rest of us alone.


_________________


smile.....anyway!
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
nb_admin
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Posts: 97
Location: Los Angeles. CA

PostPosted: Dec 06, 2006 12:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
 
Quote:

"The law has never been implemented because
it was challenged in court immediately after its signing
by former President Bill Clinton."



When I read this again it appears if was Clinton who
challenged the law, and not Clinton who signed it.
Or am I wrong still?


_________________

.netBoard Administration

Back to top View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    .netBoard! Forum Index -> Politics and Religion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

.netBoard! uses phpBB © 2008 phpBB Group
Paul James Chatman © 1996 - 2009
Galaxian Theme 1.0.2 by Twisted Galaxy