Can we please not make any more generalizations about something that varies from State to State and Country to Country? Before you start attacking my position, please read the entire post.
There is such a thing as "reasonable effort" in the eyes of the law. If a site owner or, in this case, a cyber cafe owner, makes a "reasonable effort" to control access to adult sites by making certain that he or she gets proof of age before allowing someone to access an adult site via equipment under his or her control that is legally all that is required. "Reasonable effort", in the form of a well-worded disclaimer is what makes it legal for ISPs to host adult web sites that might be seen in every legal venue within the United States. If the fact that a web site is of an "adult nature", the opportunity to "opt out" of the adult content provided on that site is clearly stated, and the option to transfer from the adult web site, in the form of an active link to a non-adult web site, is clearly provided by the owner of the web site, then the ISP who hosts the web site is not in jeopardy of being held responsible for the content of the site or the fact that someone who is not of legal age might decide to view the adult content within the site, in spite of the fact that viewer might not be of "legal age" in the community in which they are browsing. If someone is rude enough to read over the shoulders of someone who is accessing porn on an adult web site, whether in a cyber cafe, it is neither the problem of the cafe owner nor the person browsing the web, but the simple fact that someone has never been taught to mind their own business. In spite of some current efforts in Washington DC, we still have something called Freedom of Speech in the United States, and that Freedom of Speech is still protected by the Constitution of the United States - having been upheld by the US Supreme Court to be untenable by State laws. The protections guaranteed by our Constitution do not apply to countries outside of the United States, or to US Citizens when we are outside the United State. The laws of other countries do not apply to the Citizens of the United States, unless we are physically on the foreign soil of that country or within the confines of the fence line of a foreign Embassy. The issue of enforcement is one of the biggest issues with regard to our ability to control SPAM right now. Whatever laws we pass in this country that might prohibit or regulate spam will not be enforceable to those originating spam from outside our borders unless we can make an international agreement with every country in which spam might originate. At the rate the present administration is breaking previously signed treaties and agreements, it is highly doubtful that other countries are going to be very cooperative in the creation and enforcement of a new treaty. Therefore, we can all settle in for a long battle against spam that originates outside the United States. With regard to the earlier post about the person arrested for watching porn while he was driving, if you do some research into that arrest, I believe you will find that the basis for that arrest was for watching while he was DRIVING, and not necessarily for the ability of others to watch the porn thru his non-darkened windows. The fact that it was porn is secondary to the issue. Indecently, having all of the windows in a car smoked or darkened in the State of Illinois is just as illegal as driving while watching a television, video tape or DVD. In Illinois, a vehicle owner is only allowed to darken or smoke the rear passenger windows. Front seat windows and the windshield must remain clear or be tinted a light green or pale blue - no other color is allowed. Finally, please remember that "porn" is based on "community standards". That was decided by the US Supreme Court in the middle 70s when Adult Videos began to proliferate in Adult Book Stores. What is porn in the State of Tennessee (sorry, not picking on Tennessee, just using it as an example because the "community standards" in Tennessee prohibit the interstate import of Adult video tapes), is NOT necessarily porn in Illinois, California or New York. So while any jurisdiction can threaten to bring a legal action of any kind for the viewing of any web site by any person, no matter their age, so long as the provider has made a reasonable effort to determine the fact that the age of the viewer of the content is above the age of majority in the community in which the content is being viewed, if that person providing either the equipment or the content has made a reasonable effort to ascertain the age of the person actually navigating to the web site, and the venue is within the borders of the United States, then they, as the provider of the equipment and the connection, are protected by the Constitution of the United States. Bruce Barnes ChicagoNetTech Inc -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Keith Pase Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 11:20 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] OT: Adult site control Then the operator of the facility is at fault and can get sued. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fyodorov, Andrey FTL Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 11:16 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] OT: Adult site control What if the child stands over the adult's shoulder and watches him surf adult sites? To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
