1. Expression on the Net
Is it possible to control what is seen and by whom on the network?
Like a book? Newpapers? Phone call? Television?
Where to regulate: source->ISP->cloud->ISP->desitination
Publisher or Distributor? Product manufacturer or trucker?
If content is managed/filtered then acting as a publisher (see Oakmont v. Prodigy). Resulted in ISP’s not trying to filter content.
Miller test - Community standard with the “average person” test – but where is the community? Bits can go everywhere. (Dirmeyer of Tenn. v. Thomas of CA and the “Nastiest Place on Earth”) In this instance bits were like books
No metaphor is perfect, ISP’s ruled as distributor
Thomas’ in CA won case based on San Fran. Stanards, lost on Tenn standards. Ruled they did know where the bits were going via telephone #
ITEC 102

2. Communications Decency Act
CDA passed in 1996 in response to cyberporn access
Crime to use “any interactive computer service to display in a manner available to a person under 18 years of age …”
Display provisions ruled unconstitutional
Legally put the control at the point of exit from the cloud
Result was a “Good Samaritan” clause added to CDA allowing ISP filtering attempts
Zeran case – poor taste T-shirts and no recourse due to anonymous postings. In this case ISP was a knowing distributor
Original study from CMU published in student pub at Georgetown law review seriously flawed
ITEC 102

3. Who is being harmed?
Child Online Protection Act (COPA) 1998 – under 17
Cannot reliably tell if communication link is with human, computer, minor, etc.
COPA’s reach ended at U.S. boarders – how to deal with bits from abroad?
Speech illegal when incites “imminent lawless action” – rarely met by printed words. Internet bullying problems have resulted in many state anti-bullying laws and proposed federal laws.
Hard to specifically define “annoying” – current Deleting online predators act (DOPA) stuck in congress
Technological changes happen faster than legal changes
ITEC 102