On The Net, Reject Government Censorship In Favor Of Responsibility Among Users

Sens. James Exon (D-Neb.) and Slade Gorton (R-Wash.) have introduced the Communications Decency Act of 1995 (S.314), which would establish criminal penalties for anyone who "makes, transmits, or makes available any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication" if that communication is "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent." These penalties would apply to the author of the messages as well as telecommunications-service providers, including educational institutions offering network access and independent bulletin board systems. The act has the noble goal of protecting minors from access to controversial and inappropriate sexually explicit material; however, to accomplish this end, it adopts outmoded, draconian means that are neither constitutional nor effective. For scientists, its passage would have a severe impact on the free flow of scientific information and communications among researchers. Holding network service providers responsible for the content of all information and communication on their systems is a grave error that will restrict the stream of information and is contrary to First Amendment and privacy values. If service providers are held liable for all of the content on their networks, then they will be forced to attempt to screen all content before it is allowed to enter the system. In many cases, this would be simply impossible. But even where it is possible, such prescreening can severely limit the diversity and free flow of information in the online world. To be sure, some system operators will want to offer services that prescreen content. However, if all systems were forced to do so, the usefulness of digital media as communication and information dissemination systems would be drastically limited. Most important, the legislation fails to take advantage of the empowering aspects of new interactive media, which can allow parents and other users to exercise control over the information to which they and their children have access. Technologies already exist that enable users to access certain information based on a variety of characteristics, or to exclude certain types of information from access. With such filtering technology, users, instead of the government or network operators, can exercise control over the information content they receive in an interactive network environment. Parents and teachers will also soon be able to control children's access to the Internet with a new product called Surf-watch, which, when installed on a user's computer, will block access to a variable list of Usenet newsgroups, ftp sites, and World Wide Web pages considered inappropriate for children. S.314 seeks to regulate not only information that is made available in public, but also private communications between individuals. The Supreme Court has made clear that absolute restrictions on indecency or obscenity cannot pass constitutional muster under the Constitution's guarantee of personal privacy. In the landmark 1969 case Stanley v. Georgia, the Supreme Court ruled that "if the First Amendment means anything, it means that a State has no business telling a man, sitting alone in his house, what books he may read or what films he may watch." If enacted, S.314 would empower federal authorities to intrude on the private communications and information used by individuals, in clear violation of the First Amendment. The act would also bring scrutiny to the users and operators of networks used by the scientific community. The regulation of speech, commerce, and privacy rights in new interactive communications systems raises many difficult issues of public policy and constitutional law. Though the Communications Decency Act adopted means that are unconstitutional, the goals espoused by Exon and Gordon are, indeed, important. Alternative means of achieving those goals would rely on technological solutions that promote user and parental responsibility. Daniel J. Weitzner is deputy director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a Washington, D.C.-based public- interest organization. He can be reached on the Internet at djw@cdt.org. For more information about the campaign against the Communications Decency Act, send E-mail to s314-info@cdt.org. To contact Sen. James Exon, call (202) 224-4224; fax: (202) 224-5213. To contact Sen. Slade Gorton, call (202) 224-3441; fax: (202) 224-9393.

On The Net, Reject Government Censorship In Favor Of Responsibility Among Users

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of