I suspect that the filtering companies who keep their lists a dark secret are horrified at the exemption. Because they now live in fear that whatever their agendas are and whatever overblocking and error has been allowed to exist in their lists will be exposed.

With luck, and some hard work, those lists will be cracked and put up in the public domain. A move, by the way, which I would applaud. One of the reasons I work with Bob is that the IF2k list is availible - warts and all - to any client. And the client can edit that list.

If the ALA was on its game it would set list disclosure as the base for any library filtering "solution". Without that disclosure, as the Copyright Office points out, it is impossible to evaluate a filtering product. It is also impossible to determine to what degree a product blocks constitutionally protected speech beyond the requirements of CIPA.

Jay,

Have you read through my DMCA testimony? It's good stuff, I think.

Anyway, one big aspect of it, is that there's several other laws which apply to censorware blacklists - e.g. classic copyright, trade-secret, and shrink-wrap, to name the most critical.

It's not like censorware blacklists are now legally free and clear to be posted - that would be a severe misunderstanding.

I think censorware companies are upset because of more subtle factors. This is a strong finding supporting examination of their blacklists, which feeds into possible future CIPA-based litigation against them.

I wish I had more support. I see such openings here.