Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-06 Thread Steve Sobol
Gary E. Miller wrote: Does anyone actually know anyone that has actually used the V-Chip? *raising hand* Got children, y'know. :) Anything other than TV-Y, TV-Y7, or TV-PG, along with the movie ratings of approximately the same stripe, require Mom or Dad to enter our four-digit PIN before the

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-06 Thread Eric A. Hall
On 3/6/2005 11:45 PM, Steve Sobol wrote: A spokesman for newly elected Republican Gov. Jon Huntsman... The key words here are newly elected and Well as long as we are projecting our ghosts and guessing, I would argue the opposite. For one thing, his term started Jan 3 [1], while the law

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-06 Thread Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
| If HB260 is approved, it would require that Utah-based companies | begin rating their sites for [... cryptofauna]. Oh. So its just PICS. If it was P3P I'd be more interested, but as it is (or appears to be at a very great distance) PICS, yawn.

Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-04 Thread Fergie (Paul Ferguson)
The Utah governor is deciding whether to sign a bill that would require Internet providers to block Web sites deemed pornographic and that could also target e-mail providers and search engines. http://news.com.com/Utah+governor+weighs+antiporn+proposal/2100-1028_3-5598912.html?tag=nefd.top -

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-04 Thread Robert Bonomi
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 14:32:41 GMT To: nanog@merit.edu The Utah governor is deciding whether to sign a bill that would require Internet providers to block Web sites deemed pornographic and that could also target e-mail providers and search engines.

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-04 Thread Christopher L. Morrow
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote: The Utah governor is deciding whether to sign a bill that would require Internet providers to block Web sites deemed pornographic and that could also target e-mail providers and search engines.

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-04 Thread Roy Engehausen
You missed a very important line in the article: Internet providers in Utah must offer their customers a way to disable access to sites on the list or face felony charges. In other words you must provide a mechanism for a customer to opt-in to a filter. Doesn't sound illegal to force an ISP to

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-04 Thread Patrick W Gilmore
On Mar 4, 2005, at 11:00 AM, Roy Engehausen wrote: You missed a very important line in the article: Internet providers in Utah must offer their customers a way to disable access to sites on the list or face felony charges. In other words you must provide a mechanism for a customer to opt-in to

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-04 Thread Richard Irving
Roy Engehausen wrote: You missed a very important line in the article: Internet providers in Utah must offer their customers a way to disable access to sites on the list or face felony charges. In other words you must provide a mechanism for a customer to opt-in to a filter. Doesn't sound

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-04 Thread William Allen Simpson
Richard Irving wrote: I have a way. You want the Internet sites on this list blocked, -here-, your account is now _disabled_. You won't -ever- have to worry about accessing sites you don't like. :P This is another attempt to legislate something that can be solved, or should be solved, with

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-04 Thread Nanog Deform
First of all So what. Second what does this have to do with network operations? This discussion went from ISP's blocking porn to gay marriage. Joine efnet and #politics if you want to talk about gay people, but please spare us of the drama. I would have just ignored this thread if it wasn't

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-04 Thread William Allen Simpson
Nanog Deform wrote: First of all So what. Second what does this have to do with network operations? This discussion went from ISP's blocking porn to gay marriage. Actually, gay marriage wasn't mentioned Living together isn't marriage, and most common law marriage statutes have long ago

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-04 Thread Michael Loftis
--On Friday, March 04, 2005 11:06 AM -0500 Patrick W Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Would unplug your cable qualify as a way to disable access? In the same way the FCC allowed TV to so graciously implement the 'V-CHIP' technology? I doubt it. Aside fromt he normal bents of Utah, I bet

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-04 Thread Gary E. Miller
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Yo Michael! On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Michael Loftis wrote: Would unplug your cable qualify as a way to disable access? In the same way the FCC allowed TV to so graciously implement the 'V-CHIP' technology? Does anyone actually know anyone that has

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-04 Thread Eric Gauthier
Does anyone actually know anyone that has actually used the V-Chip? Though I've personally never met him, I think Eric Cartman has: http://members.tripod.com/~JB/southpark/vchip.wav http://www.moviesounds.com/sp/vchip.mp3 Eric :)

RE: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites

2005-03-04 Thread Joe Johnson
Outlook. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary E. Miller Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 1:35 PM To: Michael Loftis Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block harmful sites -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE