Face Off At Anti-Online Porn Trial

(AP)  Eight years after Congress passed a law aimed at protecting children from online pornography, free speech advocates and Web site publishers argued in federal court Monday that the never-enforced measure is fatally flawed.

Salon.com, Nerve.com and other plaintiffs warned that the 1998 Child Online Protection Act could be used to criminalize such things as sexual health information, erotic literature and news photographs of naked prisoners tortured at Abu Ghraib.

The law, signed by then-President Clinton, says Web site operators must prevent youngsters from seeing material "harmful to children" by demanding proof of age from computer users. It would impose a $50,000 fine and six-month prison term on commercial Web site operators that allow minors to view such content, which is to be defined by "contemporary community standards."

In a trial that opened Monday, the plaintiffs argued that "community standards" is too vague.

"As a parent, I know that what's fine for my daughter may not be appropriate even for some of her friends," testified Joan Walsh, editor in chief of Salon.com.

The law has never been enforced.

The U.S. Supreme Court has twice upheld preliminary injunctions that prevented the government from enforcing the law until a trial to determine the act's constitutionality can be held.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which represents the plaintiffs, argues that filter programs installed in home computers are more effective ways of policing the Internet.

Eric Beane, a government attorney, acknowledged that it is tempting to defer to families on the question of what is appropriate for children, but said the filters used by parents do not work.

"The evidence will show that a shocking amount of pornography slips through to children," Beane said in opening statements.

ACLU attorney Chris Hansen said that the government is essentially arguing that "parents are too stupid to use filters."

In preparing for its defense of the law, the Justice Department sought internal files from search engine companies and Internet service providers on what sorts of things people search the Internet for.

Google Inc. fought one such subpoena, although it primarily cited trade secrets, not privacy issues. A federal judge in California sharply limited the amount of information Google had to surrender.

The nonjury trial in front of Senior U.S. District Judge Lowell A. Reed Jr. is expected to take about a month.

[adventurepa]

docpeter,
Sorry I should have said most civalized countries. But your examples don't hold up.
Middle east is an example of countries that have allowed religious beliefs to control them and their governments. Actually Iraq now has porn.
Middle east even has countries that have young boys as favors.(Duby the country Michael jackson went)
Africa? Come on, they don't need it because they walk around naked, or just rape whoever they want. Read the news and what's happening in dow4.
Move further to the far east, Japan, China, Thailand, Hong Kong etc.
Ever heard of se* slaves? You must not have ever been to a message parlor. (high percentage of Asian decent.)
In europe and Austraila they even have nudes on TV.

Even if they say they do not allow it, believe me when I tell you, most men probably have it stashed away for their pleasure. Because it is human nature to be curious. Just like you do.

[docpeter-2009]

RE: adventurepa, where do you get your information from when you state, "In most other countries sexuality is not the taboo it is in America."? I couldn't disagree with you more. There are severe laws against pornography in many other countries. Look to the middle eastern countries such as Saudia Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanestan, and the Islamic Nations in Africa. Move further to the far east where you can serve significant prison time for possessing pornography in China, North Korea, Cambodia, Laos, etc. More than half of the world's population resides under significan pronography laws. European countries have generally less restriction than we do in America, but these countries are hardly representative of "most other countries."

[adventurepa]

Doesn't anyone remember going over that friends house who's dad had playboy. Good luck preventing a curious kid from checking out something that is part of their sexual nature.

Too bad there are not more people like Jim's dad in American Pie movies. At least he had the balls to present the human body as a thing of respect and beauty. Hate to break it to you, but most 14-15 year olds have seen naked pictures of the opposite ***.
It's up to parents to teach respect for the opposite ***. In most other countries sexuality is not the taboo it is in America. Your better off having parental controls and education to explain the sexes and respect to children, without the taboo, then government restrictions that don't work.

[nadeau4201]

How do you expect the govenment to protect our children when they can't even protect our nation. The government doesn't care about your children. If your a parent it's up to you to make sure your kids are safe online. Have you've seen what teenagers are putting on their my space sites. Taking the kids computer out of their bedrooms might help. Those disgusting sites will always be around as long as people keep going to them.

[d1hawk]

Unfortunately the law is flawed. The "community standards" part of the definition in essense creates differing standards throughout the country. What might be acceptable in NY City probably wouldn't fly in S. Dakota or Vermont. If our wise lawmakers would get thier act in gear and spell out just exactly IS harmful to children then they could probably write an enforceable law. As it is they have created a framework for thousands of different laws for the community level. Certainly they have not established anything that could be construed as "fair" throughout the nation. Never pass a law that can't be enforced!! If you are going make rules you have to spell out the rules so that people can obey them.

[hermit22]

These people who insist on vulgarity,insidiousness,filth,perversion,imposing
their lack of morals on other people's kids,
etc.etc.etc.
are complaining about the Protection Act being
"flawed"?

What is crazy about this picture?

[hermit22]

ALL these nasty sites should be required by law or some modicum of decency to write PERVERT in the beginning of each online address or ad.

Nothing wrong with a perfectly good word like pervert. It's so sad that people can't manage to drag that good word, PERVERT, out of the closet and use it when necessary.Its so insideous
to put some innocent word into the computer and up pops PERVERT stuff.

Pervert,PREEEEvert,pervert,now remember that word next time you discuss this nasty stuff.

Even the word "stuff" was used in a PERVERT connotation on some site. Let's take back the English language!

Insisting on keeping perversion is as stupid as insisting on keeping conterfeit money.