A couple of months ago this list discussed the issue of internet use in the
Minneapolis public libraries. Ran across this article today, and thought I'd
post it for anyone who may be interested.
Dave Stack
Harrison
=
The Progress Report
Wednesday December 20, 2000
http://www.progress.org
ANOTHER INTERNET CENSORSHIP CASE GOES TO COURT
ACLU Promises Legal Challenge as Congress Adopts Bill Imposing Internet
Blocking in Libraries
Government censorship measures keep getting struck down in the courts, but
legislators keep trying. Why is Congress anti-freedom and pro-censorship?
Here's what the ACLU states about this case.
WASHINGTON -- The American Civil Liberties Union said that it will soon
launch a legal challenge to legislation adopted by Congress last week that
would mandate the use of blocking software on computers in public libraries.
"This is the first time since the development of the local, free public
library in the 19th century that the federal government has sought to
require censorship in every single town and hamlet in America," said Chris
Hansen, ACLU Senior Staff Attorney. "More than 100 years of local control of
libraries and the strong tradition of allowing adults to decide for
themselves what they want to read is being casually set aside."
The measure, which was included in the year's final spending bill that was
approved on
Friday, was introduced by Senator John McCain, R-AZ. It would require
libraries and public schools to adopt acceptable use policies accompanied by
a "safety technology" - i.e., blocking software - that would block access to
materials deemed by private software corporations to be "harmful to minors."
Earlier this year, an 18-member commission appointed by Congress rejected
the idea of mandating the use of blocking software, which is notoriously
clumsy and inevitably restricts access to valuable, protected speech. A wide
spectrum of organizations have opposed blocking software mandates, including
the American Library Association, the Society of Professional Journalists,
the conservative Free Congress Foundation and state chapters of the Eagle
Forum and the American Family Association.
"There was an Alice in Wonderland quality to this debate," said Marvin
Johnson, a Legislative Counsel with the ACLU's Washington National Office.
"With its vote, Congress rejected the advice it asked for from the panel it
appointed."
The ACLU said that because blocking programs can be so restrictive and
overreaching, they significantly reduce the amount and diversity of speech
and information available to individuals. For example, House Majority Leader
Richard "Dick" Armey, a staunch proponent of Internet blocking, found his
own web site censored, because it contains the word "dick." And a recent
report by Peacefire found that several dozen websites of candidates for
Congress had been blocked by censorware.
Over the last five years, the ACLU has successfully challenged a wide range
of government efforts to censor the Internet, including the landmark Supreme
Court ruling in Reno v. ACLU and, more specifically, in Mainstream Loudoun
vs. Board of Trustees of the Loudoun County Library of Virginia, where a
federal district court found mandatory use of blocking software
unconstitutional in April 1998.
http://www.progress.org/aclu16.htm
