Congress Screams “Kiddie Porn,” Tries To Kill Public WiFi

Discussion in 'SHH Community Forum' started by SoulManX, Dec 12, 2007.

  1. SoulManX The Inspector!

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    11,034
    Likes Received:
    1
    Lack of universal access to the internet is a big problem, and it's only going to get worse with this:
    The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday overwhelmingly approved a bill saying that anyone offering an open Wi-Fi connection to the public must report illegal images including "obscene" cartoons and drawings--or face fines of up to $300,000.
    That broad definition would cover individuals, coffee shops, libraries, hotels, and even some government agencies that provide Wi-Fi. It also sweeps in social-networking sites, domain name registrars, Internet service providers, and e-mail service providers such as Hotmail and Gmail, and it may require that the complete contents of the user's account be retained for subsequent police inspection.

    It's the Patriot Act of wireless porn, forcing Starbucks clerks to turn into snitches and join Joe Lieberman and Hillary Clinton in wagging their nagging finger in the latest high-tech chapter of the culture wars, to the detriment of public WiFi:
    The SAFE Act represents the latest in Congress' efforts--some of which have raised free speech and privacy concerns--to crack down on sex offenders and Internet predators. One bill introduced a year ago was even broader and would have forced Web sites and blogs to report illegal images. Another would require sex offenders to supply e-mail addresses and instant messaging user names.
    Wednesday's vote caught Internet companies by surprise: the Democratic leadership rushed the SAFE Act to the floor under a procedure that's supposed to be reserved for noncontroversial legislation. It was introduced October 10, but has never received even one hearing or committee vote. In addition, the legislation approved this week has changed substantially since the earlier version and was not available for public review.
    Not one Democrat opposed the SAFE Act. Two Republicans did: Rep. Ron Paul, the libertarian-leaning presidential candidate from Texas, and Rep. Paul Broun from Georgia.

    This kind of legislation is only "noncontroversial" to those who think that public WiFi is a bad and dangerous thing. The chill factor it places on anyone wanting to offer it is potentially enormous; given the hefty fines in place for noncompliance, it will certainly give pause to more than a few legal eagles.
    One of the things I frequently get asked about when talking about blogs, online journalism and internet activism is the lack of availability of online access to people of color and those with limited means, who thus find themselves largely excluded from many organizing and communications opportunities. This bill may be good for the telcos and values nags, but it sucks for everyone else.



    http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/11/congress-screams-kiddie-porn-tries-to-kill-public-wifi/
     
  2. terry78 My name is Stefan, sweet thang

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2004
    Messages:
    88,409
    Likes Received:
    8,331
    What's classified as obscene? There are so many raunchy things online that aren't deemed illegal that they'd never be able to tell. Only gets worse before it gets better. I only look at pornos on my own secure wifi anyways. :o
     
  3. Mysterio Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,663
    Likes Received:
    0
    you're about a week or two late. still time to contact your senators and tell them that you oppose this legislation.
     
  4. Sandman138 Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2003
    Messages:
    11,644
    Likes Received:
    0
    Obscenity laws seriously need to be done away with.
     
  5. Carcharodon Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Messages:
    14,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    Children are meant to be obscene and not heard.
     
  6. Sandman138 Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2003
    Messages:
    11,644
    Likes Received:
    0
    But you're beautiful when you cry.:csad: :huh:
     
  7. Denny67 Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,366
    Likes Received:
    0
    This BS is Nothing more than Nanny-state legislation. There is absolulty no way to effectivly poilce this kind of thing.

    You can use every program and filter in the world and will only be about 80% successful in stopping it if you are lucky. This is a complete invasion of privacy and could ultimately require WIFI spots such as the public library, Starbucks, international airports and so on to discontinue offering the service or require registration and fees.

    There are much more effective ways of policing this sort of thing that are much less intrusive. This is to safety what patriotism is to the patriot's act. I find it truly ironic that the very same people who pointed out how out of line wiretapping was go and pull this crap. There is absolutely no difference whatsoever.

    I applauded Ron Paul once again for attempting to keep the federal government out of our lives and homes.
     
  8. bell110 Drunk on Capitol Hill

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2007
    Messages:
    3,099
    Likes Received:
    1
    Utterly sad. It does make Ron Paul look good though.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"