A U.S. federal judge sitting in Philadelphia has struck a resounding blow for free speech by striking down a 1998 law designed to put the onus on web operators to protect children from extreme material.
Judge Lowell Read Jr. was quoted as saying, "Perhaps we do the minors of this country harm if (free speech) protections, which they will with age inherit fully, are chipped away in the name of their protection." Instead he suggested that PARENTS....(Glory be, remember them? Those taller people who used to be responsible for their own children?).should employ cheaper and more effective solutions like software filters and not put all the onus on other people.
This has undermined a substantial tranche of Federal law designed to stop internet pornography at source rather than leave it to individual families to take action.
Well Judge Read you'd have my vote! Living,as I do in a Nanny state 3000 miles to the east of your own I just love this decision to put the responsibility for adult material and who sees it back where it belongs....with the parents.
Will this blast of judicial freedom for the individual encourage a similar sentiment on this side of the Atlantic. Somehow I doubt it. With Child Protection obsessions now paramount it is not in the interests of any Member of Parliament to suggest that anything but the most draconian approach should be taken in this area. Already there are new tougher rules on the way about what can be viewed on the internet. When these were submitted for an apparently 'democratic' consultation to the public, more people voted against than for - but they are still going through. That's how British democracy works you see, they ask your opinion and then ignore it!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment