Slashdot Mirror


Utah Considers Forcing ISPs to Filter Content

tipsymonkey writes "Cnet is running an article on how the Utah governor is considering signing a law that forces ISPs to filter content deemed harmful to minors. This would apply to large scale ISPs like AOL as well. They have until March 22 to decide whether or not to sign this into law."

3 of 508 comments (clear)

  1. Matter of choice by consumer by timgoh0 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The proposal , "S.B.260, says: "Upon request by a consumer, a service provider may not transmit material from a content provider site listed on the adult content registry.""

    Content filtering in this case is not forced, but a choice by the consumer

    This is similar to the content filter that my local ISPs in .sg offer.

  2. Re:FCC ? by slAckEr+Of+dOOm · · Score: 4, Informative

    The states are allowed to impose stricter regulations than the federal ones. They can censor even more than the government does, but not less.

  3. Oh puhleeze by tensai · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you read the article you'll see that the proposed law only requires ISPs to provide a way for customers to opt-in to a filtering scheme. It does not require them to filter every packet. I don't think the bill is worth the time, but let's at least evaluate it for its real faults and merits, not some sensationalized bunch of baloney.

    In the end, I doubt this law would do much. ISPs are being asked by their customers to provide content filtering. $$$ is a much more effective motivator than laws. And those who don't want to spend the money to implement it, don't have to but also will lose customers to those who do. Sounds fair to me.