Pennsylvania Court Forces ISPs to Block Porn Sites

jkastner writes "Salon is reporting that Pennsylvania is forcing ISPs to block web sites that have child porn. While we can all agree that child porn is bad, this sort of approach starts us down a slipperly slope. If one site slips through, does that make the ISP liable? In addition, the court ordered blocking may prevent access to legitimate sites that are hosted on the same server."

Comments

If you read the complete article...

[oldave]

You'll see that the state of PA orders companies that use virtual hosting to shut down the child porn sites that're on the same IP as other, legitimate sites.

"Connolly, the spokesman for the Pennsylvania attorney general, said Wednesday that in such cases involving a Web site with a shared address, authorities contact the Web-hosting companies and order them -- under threat of legal action -- to pinpoint and shut down the illegal pornographic sites."

I think there's still some question about exactly how they're enforcing this law, and as the article says, attorneys are requesting information from the PA Attorney General.

There's no good excuse for child porn, and while this law (and therefore method) may not be the way to go about it, it's a start.

Re:Now, how is this going to work?

[rot26]

Does the reach of the Pennsylvania attorney general extends beyond the border of Pennsylvania

Most assuredly.

A friend of mine spent two years in an Alabama jail for running a "porn" BBS from his home in Florida. There was nothing on his site that was any more explicit than what you would see in Playboy (some fur but no pink.) It didn't stop a grandstanding bible-thumping asshole from sticking him in jail.

Re:A confused European writes...

[TheShadow]

Why do so many Americans take the view that the Constitution is a priori a good thing in and of itself, and therefore anything that can be seen to conflict with, say, the constitutional right to free speech is in and of itself a bad thing?

And yes, I live in a land with no constitution, cameras on every street corner, and elective dictatorship and bad dentistry blah blah blah.

You just answered your own question.

Anyway... for the ignorant. The Constitution itself says nothing about specific rights that cannot be denied. That is all in the Bill of Rights which consists of the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. The Constitution just defines our system of government. Things like, how the constitution can be amended... length of terms for the President, senators, etc... requirements for holding office (presidents must be at least 35 years old and natural born citizens). It defines how our government works, it sets the boundaries for what the goverment can and cannot do. This is why it is so important. Without boundaries, you have dictatorship.

Re:Most ISPs can't even block spam....

[aridhol]

However, couldn't I still connect with 0102.043.0372.01 (66.35.250.1 in base 8)?

No, that wouldn't work. By the time the IP address gets out of your computer, it's no longer a set of four 8-bit numbers, but a single 32-bit number. So the routers that are blocking the address just have to match up the IP address in the header, as a single 32-bit number, or more likely as a masked 32-bit number (network instead of host).