Forms of Censorship of Materials on the Internet

Initial Attempts to Regulate theme on network

Garry says that "information itself has become the principal product of the field of study economy" (4). Belsio says that "the Internet is so new that no ane knows how to categorize it, much less regulate it" (3). Foreign governments in the People's Republic of China, Singapore and Bavaria admit already sought to designate limits on the field of study (i.e. censor) on Internet. A Munich prosecutor well-advised Compuserv that explcit sexuality on Internet there violated Bavarian law causing Compuserve to remove the square (Barlow 76). Three challenges have already been mounted in the United States to the freedom of content on Internet.

1. In 1992, Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) refused to allow the listing of certain items on its university computer system which is part of Internet on the bum of information supplied by one of its chthoniangraduate engineering students, Martin Rimm, who claimed the material was pornographic. CMU based its action on its alleged fear of pursuance under the Pennsylvania criminal grunge statute. This action "created an brouhaha on the CMU campus" (Faucette 1156).

2. In 1994, a calcium couple, the Thomases, were convicted under the Tennessee obscenity law by a jury in federal official Court in Tennessee of distributing pornographic images which originated with their PC in California and were shown on their BBS to an undercover investigator in Tennessee (U.S. v. Thomas)

Cohen v. California. 403 U.S. 15 (1971).

Paris Adult field of force v. Slater. 413 U.S. 49 (1973).

Rosen, Jeffrey. "Cheap Speech." New Yorker, 7 August 1995, 75-83.

3.

The federal telecommunications law passed by Congress by overwhelming majorities (414-16 in the House of Representatives and 91-5 in the Senate) on February 1, 1996 and signed into law by President Bill Clinton contains language added by amendment which was taken in modified form from a bill entitled The Coomunity Decency dissemble first sponsored by Senator Exon (D-Neb) and an amendment offered by Representative Hyde (R-NY) (Lapin 6). These riders stomach that: (1) it is a crime to send information over the Internet "on both drug, medicine, article or thing designed, adequate or intended for producing abortion" (If it's legal, it's legal, 28); and (2) imposes penalties including a fine of up to $250,000 ($500,000 for corporations) and a prison term of up to two eld for anyone who allows and fails to "make good faith efforts" to remove the transmission, posting or distribution of indecent material on the Internet to persons under the age of 18. Indecent material is defined as "any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image or other communication that in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measurable by contemporary community standards, sexual or excretory activities or organs" (Lapin 7).

The Thomas and ACLU cases will undoubtedly be ruled upon eventually by the Supreme Court. Garry says that these are merely the first of many cases involving censorship of Internet which "the courts will finally be forced to s
Ordercustompaper.com is a professional essay writing service at which you can buy essays on any topics and disciplines! All custom essays are written by professional writers!