Free Expression Policy Project on COPA and censorware
Worth echoing: Free Expression Policy Project on COPA (and censorware)
By Seth Finkelstein | posted in censorware , copa | on March 25, 2007 11:46 PM (Infothought permalink)Ironically, in view of the ACLU's educational materials pointing out the massive censorship potential of filters, the ACLU and its fellow plaintiffs now presented experts touting filters' virtues, while the government, which had praised filters a few years earlier when it successfully defended a federal law that mandated their use in schools and libraries now pointed out their flaws. The ACLU explained its apparent inconsistency by saying that filters are fine as long as nobody is compelled to use them.
With hope that you'll forgive any obtuseness on my part -- does your 'echo' imply your agreement with the excerpted ACLU opinion ('...fine as long as...')?
I use "echo" to mean "Here's an item I think worth attention". It usually implies general approval, though not always, and not necessarily word-for-word endorsement.
If you look at my COPA archive category, you'll see I've extensively covered the censorware argument in the trial. I don't tell the ACLU what to do as legal strategy, it's not my place. But I don't think it's out of line to discuss the problems with the approach that both sides took in the trial.
There is plenty of irony to go around here.
Although it is true that there are some people
who purchase a filter to protect themselves from things they do not want to see the overwhelming reason to purchase filtering is to compel someone else to have filtered access....families, schools,
workplace ,governments for example.