Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Congress Approves Child Protection And Safety Act


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 Scarlett

Scarlett

    Bleeping Diva


  • Members
  • 7,479 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:As always I'm beside myself ;)
  • Local time:07:15 AM

Posted 25 July 2006 - 08:54 PM

The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday approved a bill that would make it a federal felony for Webmasters to use innocent words like "Barbie" or "Furby" but actually feature sexual content on their sites.By Declan McCullagh Staff Writer, CNET News.com Published: July 25, 2006, 1:48 PM PDT Anyone who includes misleading "words" or "images" intended to confuse a minor into viewing a possibly harmful Web site could be imprisoned for up to 20 years and fined, the bill says.

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 saint satin stain

saint satin stain

  • Members
  • 150 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Huntsville, AL and Greenwich Village
  • Local time:07:15 AM

Posted 26 July 2006 - 04:36 AM

It is another case of big brother government aiding and abetting parents who wish to avoid realtime parenting. Parents want methods, formulas, plans, software, and laws that will do, they believe, the parenting for them.
It is simple. Your children's compute is in the livingroom, familyroom, or other common room where the parents may monitor what they do on the computer. Routers may be (this I approve) be configured to only allow them on the internet certain times. But the best child protection is a parent or parent surrogate parenting in realtime. Some provisions of this bill are unconstitutional and stupid.

saint satin stain
Responsible for what I say,
not for what you understand.
www.leftinalabama.com


#3 Animal

Animal

    Bleepin' Animinion


  • Site Admin
  • 34,724 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where You Least Expect Me To Be
  • Local time:05:15 AM

Posted 26 July 2006 - 12:57 PM

intended to confuse a minor

That one statement right there, just shows how ludicrous this bill is. This bill does not have any "teeth" in it whatsover. This will only make civil liberties lawyers that much richer. Proving intent, is nearly impossible with a good lawyer on your side. How many lousey lawyers do the purveyors of sexual content keep on retainer?

I also have to agree it is a placebo for parenting that member saint satin stain, states very well.

Be (Get a real Law) Safe

Da Bleepin AniMod, Animal

The Internet is so big, so powerful and pointless that for some people it is a complete substitute for life.
Andrew Brown (1938-1994)


A learning experience is one of those things that say, "You know that thing you just did? Don't do that." Douglas Adams (1952-2001)


"Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination circles the world." Albert Einstein (1879-1955)


Follow BleepingComputer on: Facebook | Twitter | Google+

#4 jgweed

jgweed

  • Staff Emeritus
  • 28,473 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Il.
  • Local time:07:15 AM

Posted 26 July 2006 - 02:03 PM

I just wonder how long it will stand up under judicial scrutiny, since it relies on very vague criteria.
I am always extremely worried when the government, all for the best of reasons at the time, makes yet another attempt to interfere with free speech, and further regulate our lives. Each precedent (and who would object to keeping minors safe?) erodes our privacy and freedom just a little more, until at the "end days" we do not object to putting on our own chains.....
Cheers,
John
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one should be silent.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users