Most would agree that this is indeed a real problem. However, few agree on a solution. Many think the answer lies in legislation. Others look to technology.
Each of the topics below is a long, complex story but they can be tied together into a single saga. It starts with the 1994 CMU newsgroup ban that fed the Great Cyberporn Scare of 1995, which became a large factor in the passage of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. The CDA was overturned by the Supreme Court in the 1997 decision Reno v. ACLU. Most recently in 1998 a CDA II was passed only to be followed by an ACLU v. Reno II.
Child Pornography: (a question of conduct not content) Illegal regardless of whether it is obscene. Any visual material that depicts a child engaging in explicit sexual acts or posing in a lewd and lascivious manner.
Indecency: Special term that has been regulated in 2 areas by FCC: (scarcity,
pervasiveness)broadcasting and dial-a-porn services. Generally means patently
offensive sexual content or profane language . Lobbyists for Christian Coalition
are trying to expand FCC jurisdiction over the network.
Since the saga below is divided into 8 chapters and there are 9 of you, we'll begin by examining one of the cases that highlights the problem of censorship in cyberspace:
The Amateur Action Pornography Case
What issues did the case raise?
1994: Banning newsgroups at Carnegie-Mellon University (Michelle)
CMU's fall 1994 decision to remove certain sexually explicit newsgroups from campus distribution sparked a controversy over university censorship and First Amendment rights.
Why did administrators at CMU ban these newsgroups? What was the aftermath?
The final version of the CDA (See section 502) was enacted by Congress on February 1, 1996 and signed into law as the Communications Decency Act of 1996.
What was the main thrust of the law?
1996: ACLU v. Reno (Vasudha)
As soon as the CDA was enacted, its constitutionality was challenged in a suit filed on February 8, 1996, by a coalition headed by the American Civil Liberties union. Why did they claim the law was unconstitutional?
1996: Child Pornography Prevention Act (Amy)
This law changed the prevailing definition of child pornography to include not only those images which involved actual children but those that "appear to be of a minor", thus including computer-simulated child porn. At least three federal courts ahve upheld the constitutionality of the new law. However the judges for the US Court of Appeals in the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco concluded 2-1 in 1999 that the law was unconstitutional. To settle the matter, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments, Tuesday, October 30, 2001.
1997: Reno v. ACLU (Shirleen)
On September 29th, the Justice Department appealed the Philadelphia decision to the Supreme Court, and the case now became Reno v. ACLU.
The Court heard the oral arguments on March 19th. The case was argued by Deputy Solicitor General Seth Waxman for the Government and Bruce Ennis for the ACLU and other Appellees. What were the main points made by each side? How does this differ from the ACLU v. Reno arguments?
In October of 1998 Congress passed The Child Online Protection Act (COPA) as part of its appropriations bill. This bill was referred to as the CDA II. But even before it was signed there were protests against it.
What were the main provisions of this new law? How did it differ from its parent the CDA? What were the protests against it?
1998: ACLU v. Reno II (Christina)
The following month, a federal judge blocked enforcement of COPA and this was followed by complaints brought against the law by the ACLU et al.
What was the nature of these complaints? Where are we today?
last updated 10/29/2001, by joanne@mit.edu