Brandon Hall CSC 540

 The US Government first attempted to filter the Internet in the early 90’s.  This was an attempt to protect minors against the sexually explicit material on the internet.  The US Government had a hard time coming up with a law that wouldn’t get struck down as unconstitutional due to the First Amendment.

Based on a study conducted by Joan Ganz Cooney Center and Sesame Workshop.

 CIPA (Children’s Internet Protection Act)  CDA (Communications Decency Act)  COPA (Child Online Protection Act)

 Signed into law in  This Act was the first attempt by US Congress to regulate both indecency and obscenity on the Internet.  Portions of this act was declared unconstitutional in 1997 with the case of Reno V. ACLU.

 Supreme Court found that the “Indecency” portion of the act was unconstitutional.  Justice John Paul Stevens stated that "the CDA places an unacceptably heavy burden on protected speech“  "safe harbor" section protecting ISPs from being liable for the words of others, was not affected by this decision and remains law.

 Drafted in  This act attempted to restrict to any material defined as harmful to such minors on the Internet.  COPA required all commercial distributors of "material harmful to minors" to restrict their sites from access by minors.  "Material harmful to minors" was defined as material that by "contemporary community standards" was judged to appeal to the "prurient interest" and that showed sexual acts or nudity.  The act was never signed into law, and a permanent injunction was granted in 2009.

 In 1999 the Third Circuit Court of Appeals quickly struck down this law as unconstitutional.  They stated that act was too broad in using "community standards" as part of the definition of harmful materials.  However in 2002 the Supreme Court Reviewed the case and sent it back to the Third Circuit.

 In 2003 the Third Circuit struck down the law again as unconstitutional this time stating that it would hinder protected speech among adults.  In 2004 the case of in Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) the Supreme court upheld the injunction.  Finally in 2007 US District Judge Lowell A. Reed, Jr. Stated that the act violated first amendment and fifth amendment rights.

 Signed into law in  Found to be constitutional by the Supreme court in  This act targeted schools and libraries.

 Adopt an internet safety policy.  The use of internet filters and blocking software for images that may be considered obscene or harmful to minors.  Allow the filter to be disable for use by Adults.  Enforce monitoring the use of the internet by minors.

 Miller V. California (1973)  whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards (not national standards, as some prior tests required), would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;  whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions specifically defined by applicable state law;  whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. (Miller V. California)

 Harmful to minors was defined in the act itself.  Harmful minors was defined as Any picture, image, graphic image file, or other visual depiction that taken as a whole and with respect to minors, appeals to a prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion; depicts, describes, or represents, in a patently offensive way with respect to what is suitable for minors, an actual or simulated sexual act or sexual contact, actual or simulated normal or perverted sexual acts, or a lewd exhibition of the genitals; and taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value as to minors” (CIPA)

 Client side filters  Browser based filters  Content – limited ISP filters  Server side filters  Search engine filters

 Client Side filters are installed as software, and need to be installed on each computer.  Client Side filters can be customized using a username and password.  Server Side filters are the most common type of filters for schools and libraries.  These type of filters are installed on a server, and are the same for all computers on that server.

 Content – limited ISP filters can limit the users interaction to other users with the same kind of filters. This filter is implemented by the ISP.  Browser Based filters – Google Chrome does not offer browser based filters.

 Over filtering is the main issue with filtering software. They filter key words, so searches like “Breast Cancer”, “Summa Cum Laude” don’t make it through the filters.  These filters will also block an entire site based on sexuality, even if only a page on the site has this material.

 What are the consequences if a school or library doesn’t remain CIPA compliant?  They can lose their E-Rate Funding and other government funding.  The E-Rate program provides discounts to public K-12 schools and libraries purchasing telecommunications services, Internet access, Internet connections and basic maintenance of internal connections.  Can lose federal education funding to schools for purchase of computers used to access the Internet, or to pay for direct costs associated with accessing the Internet.

 (n.d.). Retrieved from FCC:  (n.d.). Retrieved from Washington Post: dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A Jun23&notFound=true  (n.d.). Retrieved from Library Student Journal:  (n.d.). Retrieved from ENotes: schools-and-libraries  (n.d.). Retrieved from Net Safe Kids:  (n.d.). Retrieved from 2-power:  (n.d.). Retrieved from Department of information resources:  (n.d.). Retrieved from E-Rate Central:  (n.d.). Retrieved from Gizmodo: the-internet  CDA. (n.d.). Retrieved from WIKI:  CIPA. (n.d.). Retrieved from WIKI:  Content Control. (n.d.). Retrieved from WIKI: control_software  COPA. (n.d.). Retrieved from WIKI:  Hitchcock, L. (n.d.). Retrieved from  Info People. (n.d.). Retrieved from  Miller V. California. (n.d.). Retrieved from WIKI: