Slashdot Mirror
US ISPs Announce Anti-Child-Porn Agreement
An anonymous reader writes "It seems that ISPs have gathered together with 45 attorney generals and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) to form an agreement to crush child pornography. What does that mean? Probably the same as it meant for RoadRunner, Sprint, AT&T and Verizon customers — the end of the newsgroups." Here's the back-patting press-release from the various parties who signed on (the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and the National Association of Attorneys General), though the actual text of the agreement does not seem to have been made public.
methinks you meant attorneys general. what is the point of /. having editors if they don't edit?
you must be new here
first post
Don't call me back. Give me a call back. Bye. So yeah. But bye our, well, but alright we are on a shirt this chill.
Why are people hanging onto this myth? ISPs do not, and have never had, common carrier status.
What's worse is redefining "child porn" to mean "naked children". Here's the definition, read it.
"any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where -
(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; ."
(B) such visual depiction is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(D) such visual depiction is advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct . .
- 18 U.S.C. 2256
How we know is more important than what we know.
If this is going to shutdown the newsgroups, it is a semi-clever ploy to curb piracy... disguised as a "think of the children" scenario. I always enjoyed getting what warez I do grab from my ISPs hosted newsgroups, because unlike something like bittorrent, it is my ISP that is in fact "making available". Since there are actual legitimate (though very few nowadays) reasons for the existence of Usenet, they can't just turn it off. Instead, they give the world a bleeding heart story, while the RIAA and the likes line the pockets of these people.
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
I've watched a few episodes of cops where, after raiding a crack den or whatever, the cops then pose as the dealers and do a sting on everyone who buys the product. It seems like it should be similar here--raid the servers, and identify the clientÃle.
But the REALLY important thing, and I do mean the REALLY important thing, is to trackdown and rescue the exploited children. I'm okay with punishing people for participating in the distribution process; however, the reason we view it as so despicable is because of the value we place on the children involved, and our primary efforts should certainly be directed toward finding the source of child porn vs. find the recipients.
Check out the alt.binaries.pictures.erotica hierarchy sometime -- there are some groups with very suspicious-looking names.
(alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.child? Gee, I wonder what that could contain?)
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
To me, it sounds like the ISPs have agreed to turn off web sites that NCMEC complains about. They will "use NCMEC's list of active websites identified as containing child pornography, to ensure that no such site is hosted on servers owned or controlled by those companies." This is to "enforce their terms of service, all of which forbid the hosting of such illegal materials on their servers." In other words, sites are going to be turned off based on NCMEC's say so. Thus they look good for turning off sites that are illegal (think of the children!), and NCMEC gets the power they want.
From TFA:
Specifically, the cable companies have agreed to use NCMEC's list of active websites identified as containing child pornography, to ensure that no such site is hosted on servers owned or controlled by those companies. The companies will also report these instances to NCMEC's CyberTipline and where appropriate revise their policies around other potential sources of child pornography, such as, for example, newsgroups.
The agreement with NCMEC will provide cable broadband service providers with an invaluable source of information to help them enforce their terms of service, all of which forbid the hosting of such illegal materials on their servers. The information provided by NCMEC to cable service providers will also help them identify instances of child pornography, facilitating their reporting of such material to NCMEC as required by federal law. This in turn enables NCMEC to refer these cases to law enforcement for investigation and prosecution.
Oh, and the newsgroups bit seems like sensationalism to me.
There's an interesting thread at dsl reports where some bell south customers point out: 1. many news groups still exist for the purpose of porn, they just aren't named alt.bin* 2. many news groups still exist with porn, erotica, sex, etc in their names. Yesterday, I fired up Pan on att yahoo to survey the damage. The posters were right, and there were many groups left. There were also posts in them from the last few days.
I spent about 30 seconds and I couldn't find a source, but rest assured they aren't.
The confusion comes from the fact that AT&T the phone company is a common carrier but AT&T the ISP isn't.
Didn't Larry Flynt win a case on this with his Barely Legal magazine? Barely Legal obviously chooses models who look much younger than they are (e.g., an 18 year old who looks 13). I believe he won.
Google: "isp common carriers" returns...
The Uncommon Carrier
A Quick Wiki returns...
Network neutrality in the United States
A Quick Slashy returns...
Cable Internet Service Not Common Carrier
Find your own sources from there and agree or disagree.
Attacking distribution instead of production shows that the protection of children comes second to the punishing of the pedophile.
The theory is called "demand reduction".
The idea is that most child pornography is produced overseas where US authorities have no jurisdiction, and by locking up child pornography "patrons" the demand for CP will do down and therefore less children will be abused overseas.
I am not defending this theory, I am merely presenting it. I will say that very little child pornography is produced in the USA.
If i'm not mistaken... this is the same as closing highways because criminals may use them for bank robbery escape routes. this isnt about ending child porn, this has more to do with ending distribution routes used by people to destribute content themselves. In other words, the major corporations behind these ISPs have an interest in dictating usage so that they are the single delivery system for content to their end users. Child Porn is an excuse used to distract us from the real situation. The newsgroups is not full of child porn... child porn is perhaps .005% of the porn on newsgroups.
The truth is... all of the good porn, tv shows, movies, music, etc etc are on the newsgroups... that means MASSIVE bandwidth usage.
The bandwidth used by child porn sick fucks, doesnt even compare to the bandwidth being used by jackers looking at "of legal age" material, or the file traders who are sending massive amounts of data through the newsgroups.
Kiddie porn is a fucking political power move. Dont fall victom of it. Its not a widespread issue.
This is slightly off-topic, but Genarlow Wilson was a 17-year old high school football player who received consensual oral sex from a 15-year old girl and was sentenced to prison for 10 years for aggravated child molestation. He received several scholarship offers and was an excellent student. (Source)
There are also many stories of 16/17 year olds exchanging nude photos of each other and being charged with child pornography. (Source)
I think kiddie porn (pics of young children) is absolutely disgusting and people seeking it need serious psychiatric help, but our laws need to distinguish between those looking to exploit children and kids that are just sending pictures of themselves over the internet without realizing the consequences.