Slashdot Mirror

This was originally posted on slashdot when the case started, and it is excellent news to hear that the FCC regulation was indeed overruled. It is important to note that this case was about whether the FCC had the jurisdiction to impose such regulations, not on the legality of the regulations themselves. If congress decided to pass a law requiring the broadcast flag, it would probably stand.

As an aside the American Library Association (ALA) has been very active in working to protect our fair-use rights and trying to make copyright law more balanced, even though they might not be as well known here as the EFF and ACLU are. I would highly encourage anyone who cares about these things to help support them .

This was originally posted on slashdot when the case started, and it is excellent news to hear that the FCC regulation was indeed overruled. It is important to note that this case was about whether the FCC had the jurisdiction to impose such regulations, not on the legality of the regulations themselves. If congress decided to pass a law requiring the broadcast flag, it would probably stand.

As an aside the American Library Association (ALA) has been very active in working to protect our fair-use rights and trying to make copyright law more balanced, even though they might not be as well known here as the EFF and ACLU are. I would highly encourage anyone who cares about these things to help support them .

Start with the American Library Association, here

What branch of government was buring the books?

Office of Foreign Assets Control according to this news story.

I guess Google is just too hard to use these days.

This may have been mentioned, but librarians are not often in total control of their collections.

At the College where my wife, a librarian, works, the acquistions budget is divided between departments; the portion that each department receives be being based on the number of books (regardless of subject matter) checked out by students of that major. In addition the acquistions librarian is charged with processing requests for new books by professors to be added to the collection before they purchase books for the general collection.

The Fine Arts and Film deparments are the largest on campus, with the most students; so we have an excellent film and art catalog library and about 5 shelves on American history total, since there are only two history professors to teach required courses. There are a fair number of books in the Economics/Political Science section, but thats decreasing because enrollment in the department has fallen off and books aren't being replaced as they are discarded.

The filtering that Librarians do doesn't occur in a social or political vaccuum, and they are often not the most powerful idealogical faction on a campus. Or in a given community, as the many recorded instances of factional pressures on librarians to ban certain books can demonstrate.
http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/bannedbooksweek/bannedb ooksweek.htm

"The piece (LJ, February 15th 2005) was intended to be satirical, though I am certainly no fan of "blogs," having an old fashioned belief that, if one wishes to air one's views and be taken seriously, one should go through the publishing/editing process." - Michael Gorman

Some comments from librarian bloggers to this piece include this, this, this this, and this ... we're not all like Gorman in our views.

A blog is a species of interactive electronic diary by means of which the unpublishable, untrammeled by editors or the rules of grammar, can communicate their thoughts via the web.

If the President of the ALA has such a low opinion of bloggers, perhaps his organization should stop giving so many major awards to them.

I think what he actually meant to say was something along the lines of:

"A blog is a species of interactive electronic diary by means of which the unpublishable -- except for ALA literary award winners such as Orson Scott Card or Neil Gaiman or Sherwood Smith or David Brin or Jane Yolen or Dianne Duane or, oh, bugger, you know, all those other ALA award-winning authors who also blog, not that I want to imply that ALA award-winning librarians who blog, like Kathleen de la Peña McCook, are bad either, and oh, yeah, I definitely don't want to seem to be criticizing PLABlog, the brand new blog of the Public Library Association, especially not when we put out a nifty little press release crowing about it, just last month, because that would look pretty stupid, now, wouldn't it -- er, um, what was I saying, again?"

Thank your local bespeckled "digitally-savvy" Librarian for this one (and yes, I'm trained as a Librarian -- we do care about ensuring digital rights).

I want to do something; I'm just not sure what. In fact, I am doing something by referring people to losingnemo.com, which now links to your essay.

I would agree-- I think you are doing something. I found your site to be very well composed and insightful. I've included a link to you in my essay, as well.

Apparently the American Library Association is planning to do something. It's going to be interesting to see what comes of it.

Heck no, I didn't mean that that.

Fair enough-- no offense taken.

... just as fundamentalist Christians have Chick tracts to explain their views conveniently.

You know-- that's actually a pretty interesting idea. It would be really interesting to pick a scenario describing how some "everyday life" type activity is going to be changed by new "protections" afforded to "intellectual property owners", storyboard it out, and get a comic out of it. Perhaps something "broadcast flag"-related. I've always felt like, once analogue VCR's start becoming uncommon, and people start realizing that their DVD-recorder-based recordings of telvision shows aren't going to be "lendable" or, potentially, even playable after a set period of time, that some people might begin waking up-- albeit much too late.

Sorry, going to have to call 'bullshit' on you here. Show me an example of how the Patrioit Act has been misused to "go after garden variety" criminals in your community, or for that matter anywhere. Sounds like left wing wacko drivel to me.

This Google search turns up some 150-odd links, but to narrow it down to one good referrence the AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION cites:

The government is using its expanded authority under the far-reaching law to investigate suspected drug traffickers, white-collar criminals, blackmailers, child pornographers, money launderers, spies, and even corrupt foreign leaders, federal officials said. [emphasis mine]

So, is the American Library Association "left wing wacko drivel"?? Your claim of 'bullshit' has been called.

Just because somethign sounds like "left wing wacko drivel" does not make it false. The people working in law enforcement are generally good and well intentioned people trying to to the right thing and get the bad guys and simply using the tools at their disposal. The patriot act granted law enforcement absolutely unprecidented sweeping new powers, and those poweres were hastilly granted post 9/11. Numerous legislators have come out and publicly complained that they were never given a chance to read the damn bill, much less give it reasoned deliberation and debate. These legislators were told that the bill they were voting for was needed to deal with the terrorist threat, and that it only applied to terrorism, when in fact the text of most provisions were not in fact restricted to terrorism. Furthermore note that these provisions are used against suspects. By definition that means that in many cases it is in fact used against innocent people suspected of ordinary crime for one reason or another.

Dealing first hand with implications?

As he says, he works in academic library that's also a federal depository. The Patiriot act specifically says that LIBRARIANS ARE TO BE IMPRISONED if they reveal how the Patriot act has been used. He is already treading on thin ice by so much as admiting he has any first hand knowledge of Patriot act usage at all.

Further note that we are discussing a law that has already had one or more provisions ruled unconstitutional, with numerous other sections also under constitutional challenge. We are talking about a bill that was rushed through and is known to contain flaws.

-

Too bad the lawmakers never will. It's only a matter of time before the bill is rewritten in such a way that forces ISPs to use "expensive technology" to block kiddie porn.

It's also unfortunate that the same logic hasn't been applied elsewhere.

That order was rescinded:

http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=News&templ ate=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentI D=72299

"WASHINGTON, DC - The American Library Association (ALA) today welcomed the Department of Justice's decision to rescind its request that the Government Printing Office Superintendent of Documents instruct depository libraries to destroy all copies of five Department of Justice publications addressing forfeiture. The Justice Department claimed that the documents are "training materials and other materials that the Department of Justice staff did not feel were appropriate for external use." ALA disagreed with this categorization of the public documents, two of which are texts of federal statutes, and with the instruction to destroy them. ALA trusts that there will be no repetition of such unjustified instructions to destroy government information."

Though you are right in bringing it up to show what sort of "creepiness" they are trying to get up to.

cheers

front

You would believe wrong.

4. I don't get into town much. How can I take advantage of the Atheneum?
If you are homebound, the Atheneum offers free delivery of books, CDs, tapes and videos. For all cardholders, there is also direct access to the online databases of the Atheneum's reference services. Also, reference librarians are happy to respond to your questions by e-mail.

YOU ARE ALWAYS WELCOME.

Furthermore, the ALA has this to say:

Because libraries offer free access to all, they bring opportunity to all.

Intellectual Freedom is the right of every individual to both seek and receive information from all points of view without restriction.

The E-rate has played a pivotal role in helping libraries connect their users to the Internet. Today more than 95% of our nation's libraries offer Internet access to the public.

Research shows that for people without Internet access at home, school or work, public libraries are the number one point of access.

But no, let's lock down the library!

I'm not sure how to parse that sentence, but he did show the cop he was not using the library's system.

I see no problem with having "patrons" use the wifi inside where the librarians can oversee as is their job.

So how do you "oversee" a WiFi connection? Watch the logs roll by? Detail one surveillance librarian-bot to every patron to look over their shoulder? Walk around and listen for the tell-tale moans of someone surfing www.kinkyceline.com? BTW, I believe it's illegal in most states for the library (or anyone else except the FBI) to monitor your library activity and loaning habits. One example of those laws are statutes 41-8-9 and 41-9-0 of the Alabama Code which protect the confidentiality of library users.

Furthermore, here's some reading for y'all:

Libraries are a traditional forum for the open exchange of information. Attempts to restrict access to library materials violate the basic tenets of the Library Bill of Rights.
Restricted Access to Library Materials

Privacy is essential to the exercise of free speech, free thought, and free association. The courts have established a First Amendment right to receive information in a publicly funded library. Further, the courts have upheld the right to privacy based on the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution. Many states provide guarantees of privacy in their constitutions and statute law. Numerous decisions in case law have defined and extended rights to privacy.
Privacy

Users should not be restricted or denied access for expressing or receiving constitutionally protected speech. Users' access should not be changed without due process, including, but not limited to, formal notice and a means of appeal.

Although electronic systems may include distinct property rights and security concerns, such elements may not be employed as a subterfuge to deny users' access to information. Users have the right to be free of unreasonable limitations or conditions set by libraries, librarians, system administrators, vendors, network service providers, or others. Contracts, agreements, and licenses entered into by libraries on behalf of their users should not violate this right. Users also have a right to information, training and assistance necessary to operate the hardware and software provided by the library.

Users have both the right of confidentiality and the right of privacy. The library should uphold these rights by policy, procedure, and practice.
Access to Electronic Information, Services, and Networks

Alse check out LibraryLaw.com for some Patriot Act perspective.

I'm not sure how to parse that sentence, but he did show the cop he was not using the library's system.

I see no problem with having "patrons" use the wifi inside where the librarians can oversee as is their job.

So how do you "oversee" a WiFi connection? Watch the logs roll by? Detail one surveillance librarian-bot to every patron to look over their shoulder? Walk around and listen for the tell-tale moans of someone surfing www.kinkyceline.com? BTW, I believe it's illegal in most states for the library (or anyone else except the FBI) to monitor your library activity and loaning habits. One example of those laws are statutes 41-8-9 and 41-9-0 of the Alabama Code which protect the confidentiality of library users.

Furthermore, here's some reading for y'all:

Libraries are a traditional forum for the open exchange of information. Attempts to restrict access to library materials violate the basic tenets of the Library Bill of Rights.
Restricted Access to Library Materials

Privacy is essential to the exercise of free speech, free thought, and free association. The courts have established a First Amendment right to receive information in a publicly funded library. Further, the courts have upheld the right to privacy based on the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution. Many states provide guarantees of privacy in their constitutions and statute law. Numerous decisions in case law have defined and extended rights to privacy.
Privacy

Users should not be restricted or denied access for expressing or receiving constitutionally protected speech. Users' access should not be changed without due process, including, but not limited to, formal notice and a means of appeal.

Although electronic systems may include distinct property rights and security concerns, such elements may not be employed as a subterfuge to deny users' access to information. Users have the right to be free of unreasonable limitations or conditions set by libraries, librarians, system administrators, vendors, network service providers, or others. Contracts, agreements, and licenses entered into by libraries on behalf of their users should not violate this right. Users also have a right to information, training and assistance necessary to operate the hardware and software provided by the library.

Users have both the right of confidentiality and the right of privacy. The library should uphold these rights by policy, procedure, and practice.
Access to Electronic Information, Services, and Networks

Alse check out LibraryLaw.com for some Patriot Act perspective.

I'm not sure how to parse that sentence, but he did show the cop he was not using the library's system.

I see no problem with having "patrons" use the wifi inside where the librarians can oversee as is their job.

So how do you "oversee" a WiFi connection? Watch the logs roll by? Detail one surveillance librarian-bot to every patron to look over their shoulder? Walk around and listen for the tell-tale moans of someone surfing www.kinkyceline.com? BTW, I believe it's illegal in most states for the library (or anyone else except the FBI) to monitor your library activity and loaning habits. One example of those laws are statutes 41-8-9 and 41-9-0 of the Alabama Code which protect the confidentiality of library users.

Furthermore, here's some reading for y'all:

Libraries are a traditional forum for the open exchange of information. Attempts to restrict access to library materials violate the basic tenets of the Library Bill of Rights.
Restricted Access to Library Materials

Privacy is essential to the exercise of free speech, free thought, and free association. The courts have established a First Amendment right to receive information in a publicly funded library. Further, the courts have upheld the right to privacy based on the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution. Many states provide guarantees of privacy in their constitutions and statute law. Numerous decisions in case law have defined and extended rights to privacy.
Privacy

Users should not be restricted or denied access for expressing or receiving constitutionally protected speech. Users' access should not be changed without due process, including, but not limited to, formal notice and a means of appeal.

Although electronic systems may include distinct property rights and security concerns, such elements may not be employed as a subterfuge to deny users' access to information. Users have the right to be free of unreasonable limitations or conditions set by libraries, librarians, system administrators, vendors, network service providers, or others. Contracts, agreements, and licenses entered into by libraries on behalf of their users should not violate this right. Users also have a right to information, training and assistance necessary to operate the hardware and software provided by the library.

Users have both the right of confidentiality and the right of privacy. The library should uphold these rights by policy, procedure, and practice.
Access to Electronic Information, Services, and Networks

Alse check out LibraryLaw.com for some Patriot Act perspective.

The web site states that for the period from 1990 to 2000, there were "6,364 challenges reported to or recorded by the Office for Intellectual Freedom".

That's about 579 challenges total per year, or only 11-12 challenges per year in each state of the union.

Looking at it another way, the ALA reports that "There are an estimated 117,859 libraries of all kinds in the United States today." Of these, 102,990 are classified as public libraries or school libraries. Which means that over the course of 1990-2000, only 6% of these libraries received any kind of challenge.

Now, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. Given that reporting of challenges is voluntary, they may very well be under-reported. Still, the nature of controversey surrounding a challenge seems to be the sort of thing that would attract attention - in many cases, they are specifically publicized (by the challenger, or the library) in order to attract attention. So it's probably safe to work from the assumption that challenges are not drastically under-reported. Still, let's err on the side of cuation and say that we assume that challenges are drastically under-reported, and that there are actually on the order of 6000 challenges per year.

Given those figures, an individual library would expect to deal with a single challenge about once every 20 years. Of course, that assumes that each library is an autonomous unit, which is probably not the case for school libraries - I'd expect that a challenge in one school library for a district would probably affect all other libraries in the same district as well. So the time period between challanges for a school library system might be smaller, but even then, I'd be surprised if any particular school district had to deal with more than a couple of challenges each year... and in that case, well, at least it shows you have active parent involvement in the district, right? So there's still something positive coming out of the whole mess.

Now, I'm not trying to downplay the significance of these challenges. On the other hand, their relatively low frequency seems to indicate that they're not so much an issue of pervasive censorship, but instead appear to be an issue of individual libraries making the occaisional misjudgement about the desires and mores of the communities they serve.

Here is a link to the ALA's The Most Frequently Challenged Books of 2003:
http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/bannedbooksweek/challen gedbanned/challengedbanned.htm#mfcb

"They use the word 'banned' to describe books that were actually, you know, banned."

Merriam-Webster: ban: to prohibit especially by legal means; also: to prohibit the use, performance, or distribution of

The ALA: A challenge is an attempt to remove or restrict materials, based upon the objections of a person or group. A banning is the removal of those materials.

Removing Daddy's Roommate from a grade-school library is not a prohibition (legal or otherwise) on use or distribution. There's a big difference between, "You may not carry that book," which is a ban, and, "We will not carry that book," which is not (even if due to someone's objections).

Some objections are absurd, especially many of those directed at high school libraries (usually 9th-12th grade or approximately 14-18 years old, for non-Americans). The ALA has some good points, but they ought to get their terminology straight.

"They use the word 'banned' to describe books that were actually, you know, banned."

Merriam-Webster: ban: to prohibit especially by legal means; also: to prohibit the use, performance, or distribution of

The ALA: A challenge is an attempt to remove or restrict materials, based upon the objections of a person or group. A banning is the removal of those materials.

Removing Daddy's Roommate from a grade-school library is not a prohibition (legal or otherwise) on use or distribution. There's a big difference between, "You may not carry that book," which is a ban, and, "We will not carry that book," which is not (even if due to someone's objections).

Some objections are absurd, especially many of those directed at high school libraries (usually 9th-12th grade or approximately 14-18 years old, for non-Americans). The ALA has some good points, but they ought to get their terminology straight.

A challenge is an attempt to remove or restrict materials, based upon the objections of a person or group. A banning is the removal of those materials. Challenges do not simply involve a person expressing a point of view; rather, they are an attempt to remove material from the curriculum or library, thereby restricting the access of others.

Here's a thought, RTFA

1st link on the page

Challenges by Initiator, Institution, Type, and Year

The top 10 from 2003 are:

Alice series, for sexual content, using offensive language, and being unsuited to age group. Harry Potter series, for its focus on wizardry and magic.
"Of Mice and Men" by John Steinbeck, for using offensive language.
"Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture" by Michael A. Bellesiles, for inaccuracy.
"Fallen Angels" by Walter Dean Myers, for racism, sexual content, offensive language, drugs and violence.
"Go Ask Alice" by Anonymous, for drugs.
"It's Perfectly Normal" by Robie Harris, for homosexuality, nudity, sexual content and sex education.
"We All Fall Down" by Robert Cormier, for offensive language and sexual content.
"King and King" by Linda de Haan, for homosexuality.
"Bridge to Terabithia" by Katherine Paterson, for offensive language and occult/satanism.

Link

Well, lets take a look at the ALA Library Bill of Rights. Trimming only the most construable pieces:

I. Library resources should be provided for the interest[...] of all people of the community the library serves.
II. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan[...] disapproval.
III. Libraries should challenge censorship[...]
V. A person's right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of [...] age [...].

So: If the library has a public internet terminal in its resources, and some kids are interested in porn, the librarians should not only let them have access to the terminal to find what's out there, but also resist any attempts by social conservatives to require filters to prevent this, as a matter of basic library principles. This sends FoxNews conservatives orbital. QED.

I've discussed with one of my freinds who is a reference librarian how she deals with this sort of thing. (Of course, she wasn't always a librarian. In college, she was an oversexed party girl, despite a mousy appearance to the first glance. She has publicly stated that she married her husband because "he's frigging huge and screws like a bunny". She still drinks like a fish most weekends. Librarians are oft loundly debauched party animals once you get outside of the "Quiet Please" library itself.)

She occasionally sees a decidedly under-age patron using one of the public terminals to surf for porn. Her solution is to go up to the kid and say (in a helpful librarian tone at normal librarian volume) "Oh, it looks like you're searching for porn. Is there anything in particular I can help you find?" About one time in ten, the parents haven't abandoned the little weasel to their own devices, perk up their ears, and come running to chew junior out. (If they don't keep an eye on their kids, they must live with the consequences-- see patron management.) Eight of the other ten times the kid goes "no, no, I was just finished"... and leaves. No courage of their convictions, the lot of em.

Once in a while, however, the kid will actually say what he (or rarely she) is looking for. And she helps them find what they're looking for-- that's her job. Of course, she doesn't direct them to goatse.cx or stileproject.com right off; she's familiar with a variety of more tasteful sites, from browsing with her husband. (Under what conditions, I do not inquire, but can easily guess.)

Even those brave ones don't usually let the "how to search for quality pr0n" lessons last long (being freaked out by the association of sex and librarians), and usually are relieved to be referred to a dead-tree book on sex education fairly soon. Not always, though--she mentioned once having an extended conversation with an unhappy girl who was uncertain of her sexual orientation. She helped the girl find some quality material (both factual and fantasy) on the web. She also recommended the girl have a discrete talk with either her parents or the high school's sex ed teacher. And of course, there was the teenage boy who assumed that her being helpful with his finding porn meant she was loose, and tried a pickup line; she provided him with an icy (quiet) earful on the cultural significance of two rings worn on the finger next to the pinky on the left hand, on the mutual disadvantages of sex between the underaged and those significantly older, and on incivility's subtantial anaphrodisiac properties and detrimental effect on one's liason prospects. He left with a copy of "Miss Manner's Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior", with the suggestion that studying it might help his prospects among the opposite sex nearer his age group. =)

If the kid is at the library looking f

The librarians have enlisted the help of Will Turner, a known pirate who is wanted for stealing a ship from Her Majesty's Navy.

Arrrr!!!

You can join the Freedom to Read Foundation, which is a non-profit associated with ALA that takes on issues of censorship (including censorship by copyright). Or you can donate to the Frank Zappa Memorial Fund, which goes to the FTRF, as set up in Zappa's will.

While the story topic is nice, IMHO, the ALA's work in publicizing Ashcroft's demand that libraries remove information about certain US laws from their libraries is far, far more important of a public service!

Everyone's favorite tyrant AG John Ashcroft wanted ordered the American Library Association to destroy all copies of the federal laws on asset forfeiture and to prevent disclosure of their content. Thanks to quick action and a lot of publicity by the ALA and others, the fascists backed off.

The librarians have enlisted the help of Legolas Greenleaf of Mirkwood, Sindarin decendent of the Teleri...

I think the chance of being victorious over the BSA, MPAA, and RIAA's evil minions is good !

Libraries allow this because of the "Fair Use" Doctrine of The Copyright Act of 1976:

Sec. 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include - the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; the nature of the copyrighted work; the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

I have read the damned thing, and the laws which it ammended. I've also read the CALEA Petition for Expedited Rulemaking, the DMCA, and the PDEA of 2004. Here is a link to get you started ALA. If you think a divided Judiciary, at war not only with itself but with Congress and the Executive, is capable of being a competent custodian of our civil liberties - you are wrong. Sorry. That's just the way it is. When the facts are so clearly indicative of an attack on the Constitution I find no reason to be mindful of the feelings of apologists.

Ay my high school Farenheit 451 was on the required reading list, along with The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Of Mice and Men, The Catcher in the Rye, To Kill a Mockingbird, Lord of the Flies, and The Adventures of Tom Sawyer.

A number of other books were also required. The only reason I remember those is that they are listed on the The 100 Most Frequently Challenged Books of 1990-2000

FWIW, Ashcroft has denied ever using the Patriot Act to review library records. Ashcroft Says FBI Hasn't Used Patriot Act Library Provision.

Maybe there isn't as much useful information as the writers of the Act assumed was available. Libraries that I know something about have taken steps to prevent archiving data about patrons that could be the subject of a Section 215 request.

Huh, you might want to check out (sorry) Code of Ethics of the American Library Association ( http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/statementspols/codeofet hics/codeethics.htm and the Bill of Rights

Even minors have privacy rights

Huh, you might want to check out (sorry) Code of Ethics of the American Library Association ( http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/statementspols/codeofet hics/codeethics.htm and the Bill of Rights

Even minors have privacy rights

If there was no Patriot Act, you guys would bash the President for not having something in place.

Well, I can't speak for everyone on Slashdot, but I personally would not be complaining about the lack of PATRIOT.

I hope you understand that the Patriot Act passed with only 3 no votes. So even if he did veto it, it would still be enacted. So you all should be bashing your local congress/senate person for voting for it

I can't agree, for a number of reasons.

a) The Bush administration was the originator of the PATRIOT Act. Congress didn't get together and say "gee, it would be really great if judges were cut out of the law enforcement loop...let's make an act allowing this!" That's all Ashcroft.

b) Saying that "because element X also did something wrong, you should not complain about element Y" is not correct reasoning. Perhaps they should be recieving flak that they are currently not; that does not mean that Bush should not be complained at.

c) Just because they voted for it does *not* mean that they would override a veto of it -- that Bush vetoing the vote would not have stopped PATRIOT. There's a significant political difference between the two.

It is interesting seeing a Bush supporter on Slashdot, though.

Um, how about the PATRIOT act? According to the American Library Association's website, the law now permits the FBI to compel libraries to produce library Internet use records without a warrant.

While it doesn't directly close down those library terminals, it is certainly comparable to the Chinese practice of requiring video surveillance of cybercafe patrons. And that goes a long way toward discouraging use of the internet for anything that the government doesn't like.

...since it's also National Library Week.

If I had my way, I would give unrestricted access to the web (with a browser with popup blocking to avoid those porn storms) for my users. Probably still restrictive in elementary labs, but once the kids hit secondary, they'd be able to go anywhere, since they already can at home. Teachers in my district do teach the kids about reliable sources, in particular on the internet, since it is so widely used now. Unfortunately, if I don't block these sites, we lose funding. We are required to have a CIPA approved filter blocking "inappropriate" material from the web. If we don't, we lose money, which is a bad thing.

However, there is a ray of hope shining through. While CIPA requires a safety policy that addresses "Access by minors to "inappropriate matter" on the Internet", exactly what that material is is determined by the district. So the material that needs to be blocked according to CIPA is

Obscene
Child pornography
Harmful to minors

So a district theoretically could have a fairly lax filtering policy. As a part of our state mandated tech plan, we'll be reassessing our web filtering policy this summer. Hopefully we can become less restrictive in what we block; I just need to do some political maneuvering to make sure I get the policy I want. :-p

Catcher in the Rye still makes the top 20 list of challenged books - constantly. Along with many other books that children of all ages read. For crying out loud, Harry Potter has been making the top 20 every year since they appeared on the shelves. No matter what you watch, play, read, or say there will always be someone who thinks that "goes too far" or is "over the line". The problem is, they are using the wrong line to measure with. _I_ determine what is over the line for myself and my children. Just as everyone else should.

Further to my last post ...

The ALA has some comments on mass-market licenses. In general a negotiated contract is enforcable over Copyright law, while a non-negotiated one ... well, that depends on the court, from time to time.

So riddle me this: a fBSD kernel coder sees a cute trick in the Linux kernel and, with minor modifications, uses it. Infringement or not?

Is it fair use?

• It is small, probably factual (despite its precise expression), so it probably meets the requirements for fair use.
• The GPL is non-negotiated, and thus fair use may be a defense against infringement.

Ouch. Strictly a violation of the GPL, but legally acceptable? How far does this go?

These folks make the case far better than I can:

EFF's position paper
The American Library Association
Joe Barr mentioned a couple good points in his article at Creative Loafing.

Here's the DOJ's take. When you read it, ask yourself who defines a terrorist, and would you be willing to believe them?

Finally, the USA PATRIOT Act
(Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) Hell, with a cool ass acronym like that for a name, how could you possibly be against it ;)
(read: How could you possibly not be against it. Tortuously clever acronyms are often a sign of bad policy)

Their new ad campaign with naked women went too far in my opinion. They were basically asking to be sued. Didn't they think about the children?

chilling effect

The supreme court takes chilling effects very seriously, however it mostly applies in 1st amendment cases. Patriot act issues mostly aren't 1st amendment though.

We can't abolish all laws against rape and murder just because someone might make a false accusation.

I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. The Partiot act is 342 pages long. It contains 1016 sections, and it grants an entire laundry list of new police powers. Many of the provisions are fine, but there are some pretty bad ones mixed in as well. In some cases there were re-grants of powers that congress specificly revoked because they had proven to be harmful.

The Patriot act was passed in a fit of hysteria. There was no opportunity for debate and no amendments were permitted. Even the bill's sponsor, Senator Leahy, admited there were problems with some of the provisions: "Despite my misgivings, I have acquiesced in some of the administration's proposals because it is important to preserve national unity in this time of crisis and to move the legislative process forward." The other legislators who voted it through not only failed to give each of the provisions careful consideration, they generally didn't even get to SEE the bill. According to another senator many of them didn't even read the summary!

I haven't read the 342 pages of this law, but organizations such as the ACLU and the EFF have, and they have pointed out some rather troubling sections. Hell, even " the American Library Association considers that sections of the USA PATRIOT ACT are a present danger to the constitutional rights and privacy rights".

We really shouldn't wait a couple of years for the supreme court to strike down specific provisions while innocent people get crushed and abused. And then there are the bad-but-not-unconstitutional provisions. The courts can't strike those down. Those will continue to cause problems until congress gets around to fixing them.

-

I too support Senator Feingold in his opposition of the USA PATRIOT Act. It is sad that there was only one, but better than having none oppose it.

Perhaps because if you filter out such terms it would be reasonably impossible, save for physically marching to every university library on the planet, to research all manner of subjects.

The fact that anything is abhorrent, no matter the severity or lack thereof, is precisely why information on it should be available. Someone typing in AskJeeves "how could you kill eight million Jews" should be able to pull up the text of the Nuremburg trials without risking a lawsuit for attempted murder or copyright infringement of the estate of Stanley Kramer.

That principle is far more in the public interest than whether or not Britney Spears' royalties are at stake, let alone her record label or the company profitting from piracy of her music, which is why you will find the issue of filtering at the top of the issues concerning the American Library Association.

http://www.ala.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Our_Asso ciation/Offices/ALA_Washington/Issues2/Civil_Liber ties,_Intellectual_Freedom,_Privacy/Civil_Libertie s,_Intellectual_Freedom_and_Privacy.htm

Ahem. This ALA-accredited librarian (I just happen to work in the software industry) is offended by the summary and linked-to site's suggestion that libraries don't encourage a sense of community.

As well as making books, videos, CDs, and other media available to patrons, physical libraries tend to offer their facilities to groups (for no or nominal fees) to get together for discussion. I have attended poetry-writing sessions, mid-80's computer clubs, environmental activism sessions, and local community groups, all hosted by local public libraries. Just check the bulletin boards (physical, or online) for notification and invitation to attend the many happenings at your local library.

Here are a few stats from a March 2002 survey commissioned by the American Library Association:

• 66% of all respondents reported using the public library at least once in the last year in person, by phone, or by computer.
• Of those respondents who reported using the public library in person in the last year, 67% said they had taken out books, 47% had consulted a librarian, 47% used reference materials, 31% read newspapers or magazines, 26% connected to the Internet, 25% took out CDs or videos, and 14% heard a speaker, saw a movie or attended a special program.
• 91% believe libraries are changing and dynamic places with a variety of activities for the whole family.

Those 14% sure have good opportunities for developing some sort of a community.

Maybe walking into a room without knowing anyone else there is daunting, so virtual communities like http://www.communitybooks.org offer a lower courage barrier for participating -- but at the same time, it's a little easier to melt into the background (or flame like mad) when you disagree with someone else's position.

And please--that stereotype of you'll probably get shushed is way wrong. If you get shushed, it's not going to be a librarian telling you to be quiet; they want you to be active and engaged. If you're approaching another patron who is trying to read, that patron might respond positively or negatively--but that's the risk you have to take if you really want to make contact with someone else who appears to share your interests.

Ahem. This ALA-accredited librarian (I just happen to work in the software industry) is offended by the summary and linked-to site's suggestion that libraries don't encourage a sense of community.

As well as making books, videos, CDs, and other media available to patrons, physical libraries tend to offer their facilities to groups (for no or nominal fees) to get together for discussion. I have attended poetry-writing sessions, mid-80's computer clubs, environmental activism sessions, and local community groups, all hosted by local public libraries. Just check the bulletin boards (physical, or online) for notification and invitation to attend the many happenings at your local library.

Here are a few stats from a March 2002 survey commissioned by the American Library Association:

• 66% of all respondents reported using the public library at least once in the last year in person, by phone, or by computer.
• Of those respondents who reported using the public library in person in the last year, 67% said they had taken out books, 47% had consulted a librarian, 47% used reference materials, 31% read newspapers or magazines, 26% connected to the Internet, 25% took out CDs or videos, and 14% heard a speaker, saw a movie or attended a special program.
• 91% believe libraries are changing and dynamic places with a variety of activities for the whole family.

Those 14% sure have good opportunities for developing some sort of a community.

Maybe walking into a room without knowing anyone else there is daunting, so virtual communities like http://www.communitybooks.org offer a lower courage barrier for participating -- but at the same time, it's a little easier to melt into the background (or flame like mad) when you disagree with someone else's position.

And please--that stereotype of you'll probably get shushed is way wrong. If you get shushed, it's not going to be a librarian telling you to be quiet; they want you to be active and engaged. If you're approaching another patron who is trying to read, that patron might respond positively or negatively--but that's the risk you have to take if you really want to make contact with someone else who appears to share your interests.

Does not require the agent to demonstrate "probable cause," the existence of specific facts to support the belief that a crime has been committed or that the items sought are evidence of a crime. Instead, the agent only needs to claim that he believes that the records he wants may be related to an ongoing investigation related to terrorism or intelligence activities, a very low legal standard.

Understandably people are taking a closer look at the provisions under the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) Act now that the initial shock of 9/11 has worn off. The reaction to "do something" is not being governed by the climate of fear and the urgent feeling for a rapid response that followed the attacks, which also meant that many legislators didn't read or understand the entire bill. The fear of political opponents using a vote against a bill with the name "PATRIOT" didn't help.

Obviously many of those who are taking a sober second thought about the provisions don't like what they see, and this may be the start of a movement to let the sunset clause on the act take effect. It is set to expire at midnight (0h00) January 1, 2006.

Librarians are at the forefront of the movement and the American Library Association's USA PATRIOT Act campaign is one of many legislative and privacy issues that they address.

The July 4th weekend may be a good time to think about the USA PATRIOT act, argues the SJMC. Declan McCullagh offers his thoughts on the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 AKA PATRIOT Act II. You can also read EPIC's view of the DSEA 2003 and the original USA PATRIOT Act. They also have links to the text of the legislation and other info.

Understandably people are taking a closer look at the provisions under the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) Act now that the initial shock of 9/11 has worn off. The reaction to "do something" is not being governed by the climate of fear and the urgent feeling for a rapid response that followed the attacks, which also meant that many legislators didn't read or understand the entire bill. The fear of political opponents using a vote against a bill with the name "PATRIOT" didn't help.

Obviously many of those who are taking a sober second thought about the provisions don't like what they see, and this may be the start of a movement to let the sunset clause on the act take effect. It is set to expire at midnight (0h00) January 1, 2006.

Librarians are at the forefront of the movement and the American Library Association's USA PATRIOT Act campaign is one of many legislative and privacy issues that they address.

The July 4th weekend may be a good time to think about the USA PATRIOT act, argues the SJMC. Declan McCullagh offers his thoughts on the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 AKA PATRIOT Act II. You can also read EPIC's view of the DSEA 2003 and the original USA PATRIOT Act. They also have links to the text of the legislation and other info.

Widely adopted? The link you gave says that 26 of the state attorney generals actively opposed it. How many states have actually adopted the UCITA? Two?