The Free Expression Policy Project has some interesting material in their CIPA argument analysis. I remember the following well:
Seven years ago, many advocates were arguing that Internet filters were a "less restrictive alternative" to criminal laws banning "indecent" speech on the Internet. But some prescient ones opined that filters would actually be even worse. Despite the chilling tenor of the Supreme Court argument in US v. ALA, one hopes that at least five of the justices will come to the same conclusion.
At the time, law professor Peter Junger wrote the best the best legal analysis on the above topic I've ever seen.
By Seth Finkelstein | posted in censorware , legal | on March 07, 2003 03:25 PM (Infothought permalink) | Followups