|
search / subscribe / upload / contact |
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| RSS-Feed Depeschen |  |
|
|
||
|
||
Date: 1998-06-25
Filter/zwang: Neuer Anlauf im U.S. Kongress-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- Filter/zwang: Neuer Anlauf im U.S. Kongress Schon mal von Representative Ernest Istook (Oklahoma) gehört? ACLU & EFF halten ausgesprochen wenig von seiner neuen Bill, die Bibliotheken öffentlich verpflichten soll, nur zensurierte Internet/zugänge anzubieten. WASHINGTON Yet another censorship threat to the Internet has emerged in Congress with the approval by a House appropriations subcommittee of a new measure that would force public schools and libraries to install costly and ineffective blocking software. Sponsored by Rep. Ernest Istook, R-OK, the new measure is similar to legislation approved by the Senate Commerce Committee in March. But the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation said that the new Istook amendment differs in that it would require schools and libraries to install filtering software to block only obscene information, a requirement that is not technologically feasible. No one is suggesting that children should have access to obscene material, said Ron Weich, a legislative consultant on cyberliberties issues for the ACLUs Washington National Office. But the Istook amendment ignores the hard fact that it is technically and humanly impossible to block access only to obscene material. For Congress to adopt the Istook amendment, Weich added, would be like ordering every newsstand in the country to be wrapped entirely in a brown paper bag to protect any child from seeing any potentially obscene materials. The Labor, Health and Human Services and Education subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee approved the Istook amendment as it considered $81.9 billion in spending for the government in fiscal year 1999. The measure will next be considered by the full House Appropriations Committee. The ACLU has warned that forcing schools and libraries to install blocking software would cost some communities hundreds of thousands of dollars. In addition, the Istook amendment would likely impose new staffing requirements on local schools and libraries. We believe that local educators, parents and librarians, not Congress, should be the ones making decisions about what students can see on the Internet, said Barry Steinhardt, President of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Although the ACLU and EFF support parents rights to install blocking software in the home, it warns that the technology is clumsy and ineffective. In a new report, Censorship in a Box: Why Blocking Software is Wrong for Public Libraries, the ACLU said that no product can effectively screen the vast content of the web and that many products block constitutionally protected speech for ideological reasons. Just last month, in fact, the American Family Association, a conservative advocacy group, learned this lesson when it discovered that CyberPatrol, a popular brand of blocking software, had placed AFA on its Cybernot list because the group is considered intolerant of homosexuality. You can no more create a computer program to block out one communitys view of indecency or obscenity than you can devise a filtering program to block out misguided proposals by members of Congress, Steinhardt said. Both may be desirable, but neither are possible. The new ACLU report, Censorship in a Box, can be found on the ACLUs Freedom Network at http://www.aclu.org/issues/cyber/box.html. - -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- edited by published on: 1998-06-25 comments to office@quintessenz.at subscribe Newsletter - -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- 
|
|
|
 |
CURRENTLY RUNNING |
q/Talk 1.Juli: The Danger of Software Users Don't Control
|
|
|
!WATCH OUT! |
bits4free 14.Juli 2011: OpenStreetMap Erfinder Steve Coast live in Wien
|
|