WorldCom Forced To Block Questionable Sites

Cutriss writes "Seen on Wired, this article briefly mentions how the Pennsylvania State Government is forcing UUNet to block access to five child pornography sites, under their new state law. No mention was made as to whether they were domestic or foreign. I'm certainly no fan of kiddie porn, but this ruling also serves as a blow to the 'common carrier' status that any whatever-tiered ISP should have in theory, and in practice. Also, this is a state law, not a federal one, but the end result is nationwide. This isn't a whole lot different from Yahoo! France being sued for making auctions of Nazi propaganda viewable by French citizens."

Comments

Who's rights we talking about?

[FortKnox]

When I speak for censorship, especially in other countries without a constitution, I get the argument: "Some rights are universal".

What about the rights of these children? You know, the right not to be abused. The right not to be defiled. The right to have their pasts wiped away so they can try to live a regular life.

You people MAKE ME SICK.

Some things are worse than censorship. Prioritize.

Re:Who's rights we talking about?

[baskil]

Some things are worse than censorship. Prioritize. I don't think that anyone would argue with you that child pornography is worse than censorship. Those sites should be closed off at the source. Shutting off access for a few million potential visitors does NOTHING to protect these children from being abused. On the other hand, the restriction of these sites sets a prescedent that government/special interest groups can influence a content provider to restrict access. First this, then some news site that doesn't agree with with the government's view or rulings. And then, slowly, your right to free speech erodes away. There are better ways of solving this problem.

Re:Who's rights we talking about?

[lostPackets]

You're missing the point. The concept of Kiddie Porn turns my stomach as well. No one here is arguing that child pronography is an acceptable thing.

Personally, I think anyone caught producing or directly distributing it should be deal with harshly.

The point is that the PA goverments is ordering a carrier to take full responsibility for the content. If you plot a crime using the phone is the phone company liable?
Wait I forgot, it's just like terrorism. Since I don't support this "I must not care about the children". Well bullshit, I have a five year old I love to death, I think the people who are caught pursueing these site's and certainly the people creating this material should be thrown in prisions so lonely that they'll pay spiders for sex. That doesn't have anything to do with the issue at hand

Good.

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate to give up freedoms, but if it is afreedom that allows publishing kiddie pr0n, take it away as long as it only applies to that. Some may say slippery slope... I don't think so. Perhaps we should just find the people who are doing the pr0n and hang 'em high.

The problem is those that enforce the constitution

[Anonymous Coward]

The largest part of the problem from my point of view is the Supreme Court. These criminals, yes they are all criminals, are fucking up the constitution so badly it's about as binding as a contract on toilet paper written in shit.

Examples:

Amendment II: (Right to keep and bear arms)
Fully automatic weapons have a high "tax" on them at this point. No more can be produced for anyone but law and military organizations. If you take a legal (preban) fully automatic weapon outside the US it *CANNOT* come back into the US. So they are only getting fewer in number. Now the crusade is on to get rid of assault weapons. For no other reason than they look mean...like a fully automatic weapon. The "People's Republic of California" read(marxist fuckheads) have already banned several of these types. (i.e. ak47, ar15). What's more in this shithole of a "STATE" you cannot own the federally legal fully automatic weaponry even if you do pay the "tax". This doesn't sound to me that they are following the constitution very closely. That part about the "shall not be infringed."...kind of convenient to just ignore that one.

Amendment VII: (Excessive bail, etc.)
HAHAHA...this happens all the time.

Amendment X: (Constitutional rights and states rights)
The "people's republic of California" and doubtless other states violate this one all the time.

Amendment XIII: (Abolition of Slavery)
This one is violated everytime there's a draft. In fact it was challenged and the Supreme court said that it didn't apply!?!?! How the frickin' hell does "...or involuntary servitude...) *NOT* apply! In times of draft it's "you" go here and "die". And "you" say I don't wish to, they put you in jail or force you at the point of a gun. That's pretty fucking involuntary to me! If you doubt this do a search for XIII and draft on the supreme court historical rulings. It was challenged 2x and TWICE the court just kind of ignored the constitution and upheld the draft!

This country was founded on the constitution and in my opinion if you don't uphold the constitution you should die! End of story. These dickheads ignore it whenever it's convenient for them.

And to add insult to injury these wastes of skin are appointed for *LIFE*. In this sense I guess I would be happy if they were executed...that would fullfil the "job for life" bit nicely I think.

Russia: The new America.

Child abuse

[0x0d0a]

Children were being abused before the Internet even existed, and they'll still be abused after Worldcom implements this decision

Child abuse (at least in the US) is a lot lower than it would have been in, say, the Middle Ages, or even a hundred years ago. Don't lose sight of this -- it's not some new, looming danger -- it's something on the drop.

Now, obesity or cancer is another story...