Pennsylvania Child Porn Act Overturned

Ghoser777 writes "According to MSNBC, a Pennsylvanian law that required ISPs to filter/block websites containing child porn has been overturned by a federal judge. Child porn is still illegal under U.S. federal law, but the judge found that 'there is an abundance of evidence that implementation of the Act has resulted in massive suppression of speech protected by the First Amendment.'"

Comments

Classy

[Skjie]

Good to see that Child porn is better than Gay marriage....

Why on earth we had this child porn?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is there because animals on earth needs this.. when an animal do this... we wont call this pron.... we humans are also animals.

In India older .. grand .. people used to kiss their grand childern(less than a year) on their genetals .. expressing the happnies.

Any restrictions imposed on human expression... will take an another form/means to express it.

I don't know what is child pron... but i understands from the tone of slashdotters it is a worng thing .... Where we are doing mistake?

any insights:
slashdot ... any one of you, ever happend to speek to an Child porn producer? for that matter porn producer?
Why those kids happend to be part of porn?

Re:Great

[Kn0xy]

"Neither. RTFA:

Over two years, the groups said, ISPs trying to obey blocking orders were forced to cut access to at least 1.5 million legal Web sites that had nothing to do with child pornography or even legal pornography, but shared Internet addresses with the offending sites.

Thanks, I did RTFA. I was wondering of who the Judge had in mind when he ruled that it was against the amendment, was it those Seeking the Sites or Those Seeking the Visitors. I did not ask how it hurt Legal Porn sites based on poor choices in Hosting Solutions. Telling Me 'Neither', then quoting a line that basically smells of 'Poor Site Owners.' doesn't answer that question, just points to a reason why people, not the judge (who is technically supposed to be unbias), did not appreciate the law.

"This was a bad law. Striking it down was the right thing to do."

No Doubt.

"I was AOL remote staff for a number of years, beginning when I was only 14 myself. I started in the Mac Help forum, and was there throughout my AOL tenure."

That sums up and explains so many things.

..."I am not a "child porn expert," nor do I want to be. I'm just someone who has spent many years online, a lot of them dealing with kids (much of that time I was a "kid" myself) and encountering child porn in those situations."

One Word: 'Shenanigans'. Who puts anyone between the ages of 14-17 yrs old, in a position that requires the possibility of filtering Porn? Makes that stink worse since supposedly, it was a duty for a Library.

And your experience moderating some channel on AOL, is more than likely nothing impressive to an IRC Operator, probably not even to a Channel Op. We do that and more everyday, and we don't need an AOL account to do so.

/. molesters

[Teahouse]

Funny how so many of you feel the need to defend this. Is there a reason? Funny how you are all getting modded up if you are for child porn.