Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Neither of these methods is foolproof. The Web contains millions of pages contain-
ing pornography, and new sites continue to be created at a high rate, so any blacklist of
pornographic sites will be incomplete by definition. Some filters sponsored by conser-
vative groups have blacklisted sites associated with liberal political causes, such as those
sponsored by the National Organization for Women and gay and lesbian groups. The al-
gorithms used to identify objectionable words and phrases can cause Web filters to block
out legitimate Web pages.
CALVIN AND HOBBES © 1990 Watterson. Dist. By UNIVERSAL UCLICK.
Reprinted with permission. All rights reserved.
3.7.2 Child Internet Protection Act
In March 2003, the Supreme Court weighed testimony in the case of United States v.
American Library Association . The question: Can the government require libraries to
install antipornography filters in return for receiving federal funds for Internet access?
More than 14 million people access the Internet through public library computers.
About one-sixth of the libraries in the United States have already installed filtering soft-
ware on at least some of their computers. The Child Internet Protection Act requires that
libraries receiving federal funds to provide Internet access to its patrons must prevent
children from getting access to visual depictions of obscenity and child pornography.
The law allows adults who desire access to a blocked page to ask a librarian to remove
the filter.
In his testimony before the Supreme Court, Solicitor General Theodore Olson ar-
gued that since libraries don't offer patrons X-rated magazines or movies, they should
not be obliged to give them access to pornography over the Internet.
Paul Smith, representing the American Library Association and the American Civil
Liberties Union, argued that in their attempt to screen out pornography, filters block
tens of thousands of inoffensive pages. He added that requiring adults to leave the
workstation, find a librarian, and ask for the filter to be turned off would be disruptive
to their research and would stigmatize them.
In June 2003, the US Supreme Court upheld CIPA, ruling 6-3 that antipornography
filters do not violate First Amendment guarantees [59]. Chief Justice William Rehnquist
wrote, “A public library does not acquire Internet terminals in order to create a public
forum for Web publishers to express themselves, any more than it collects books in order
toprovideapublicforumfortheauthorsofbookstospeak...Mostlibrariesalready
 
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search