Public Policy Alert - Center for Democracy in Technology
By a razor thin margin, members of the House Conference Committee on
Telecommunications Reform have approved a broad proposal to censor
constitutionally protected speech on the Internet. The provisions adopted
today would make the Internet and Interactive media the most heavily
regulated medium in the United States, and severely threaten the future of
free expression and democratic values in the information age.The proposal, if agreed to by the full
conference committee, would impose $100,000 fines and prison terms for
anyone who posts any "indecent" material, including the "7 dirty words",
the text of classic works of fiction such as The Catcher In The Rye, or
Ulysses, artwork containing images of nudes, rap lyrics, in a public
forum.CDT strongly opposes the legislation
agreed to by the House conferees today. We believe this proposal threatens
the very existence of the Internet as a means for free expression,
education, and political discourse. The proposal is an unwarranted,
unconstitutional intrusion by the Federal government into the private
lives of all Americans.Indecent material is constitutionally
protected speech which the Supreme Court has ruled can only be restrictive
through the "least restrictive means". Material that has been considered
"indecent" has included, among other things:* The so-called "7 dirty words"
* The Catcher In The Rye
* Sex and AIDS Education literature
* Photographic, sculpted, and painted images of nudes
* Rap Lyrics
Posting any of the above materials in a
public forum would be illegal under the provision approved today. Although
it is unrealistic to expect that Federal law enforcement has the resources
to go after each and every violation, the threat of $100,000 fines and 2
year prison sentences will result in a severe chilling effect over all
online communications.CDT will devote all our efforts in the
coming weeks to ensure that the full conference committee does not
endorse the approach approved today by the House. We are also committed
to fighting this battle all the way to the Supreme Court, if necessary,
to ensure that these provisions are overturned.The text of the proposal will be placed
on CDT's net-censorship web page (URL below) as soon as it's available.
CDT will also post a detailed analysis of the bill soon.White House Proposal Adopted, Then Amended To Include Indecency Standard. 2 Liberal Democrats Tip The Scales In Favor Of Religous-Right
At today's meeting of the House and Senate Conference Committee members, Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL) offered his proposal to prohibit the transmission and display of indecent material online, and grant the FCC new authority to regulate the Internet. As expected, Rep. Rick White (R-WA) offered his alternative, based on the narrow and constitutional "harmful to minors" standard and provisions to encourage parental control, not government censorship. The House conferees then adjourned to a private room, away from the press and television cameras, to vote.
The Conferees voted 20 - 13 to accept
the White proposal. However, Rep. Goodlatte (R-VA) offered an amendment
to substitute "indecency" for the "harmful to minors" standard in the
White proposal. The Goodlatte amendment was approved on a vote of 17 - 16
and the "harmful to minors" standard was replaced by the blatantly
unconstitutional "indecency standard".Representative White did NOT vote for
the Goodlatte amendment.Amazingly, two traditionally liberal
democrats, Reps. Pat Schroeder (D-CO) and John Conyers (D-MI) voted for
the "indecency" standard! Had either of these members voted the other
way, libraries, schools, and even parents who allow children to access
the text of The Catcher In The Rye online would not now face $100,000
fines and prison sentences. Schroeder and Conyers should be ashamed of
themselves for not standing up for freedom of speech and democratic
values at such a critical moment, and for assisting the campaign of
religious conservatives to impose their moral values on the Internet
without regard for long-standing constitutional principals.Representative White should be commended
for his efforts to craft a constitutional proposal which preserved
freedom of speech and relied on user empowerment over government control
of online content. He deserves great credit for his commitment to
protecting the Internet and preserving freedom of speech, and his
willingness to stand up to religious conservatives. Unfortunately, the
critical element of his proposal which made it constitutional was removed
over White's objections.Next Steps
The provision approved today by the committee is similar to the Exon/Coats CDA in that it relies on the "indecency" standard and contains defenses for online service providers. The Senate is likely to adopt the proposal with only minor changes. Senator Exon expressed optimism at today's conference committee meeting that the issue would be resolved soon, perhaps as early as Friday.
The Senate conferees are reviewing the
language agreed to today by the House conferees. The House and Senate
must each agree on the provisions before the final bill can be voted on.
CDT will keep you informed of developments on this issue as they occur.For More Information
Visit CDT's net-censorship issues web page: http://www.cdt.org/cda.html