The CHIPA case is only the latest round in an ongoing public debate about how and when people under 18 should be given access to the Internet. "Before use filtering software, they need to make it capable of filtering out the wrong Web sites." "You'd be amazed where you can go even if you are using filtering," Manley notes. Plus, these programs fail to block a lot of sites adults would consider obscene. People using the software are routinely blocked from progressive sites like the ACLU's and PlanetOut and truly random destinations like homepages of major universities and others featuring maps of Disneyland. While blocking programs are supposed to serve as filters against child pornography and content that might be harmful to minors, in reality this software tends to block sites in a way ACLU representative Emily Whitfield describes as "capricious." Headed for the Supreme Court in March 2002, ACLU lawyer Ann Beeson and her colleagues will argue the unconstitutionality of the Child Internet Protection Act (CHIPA), a law passed by Congress last year stipulating that libraries and schools will lose their federal funds if they don't install blocking software like NetNanny or CyberPatrol.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |