IP: ClariNet files suit over Communications Decency law

[Dave Farber <farber@central.cis.upenn.edu>]

From: 
http://www.clari.net/suitpage.html


            ClariNet files suit over Communications Decency law


ClariNet, along with several other electronic publishing companies and
organizations, have filed suit against the Attorney General to get the
newly passed "Communications Decency Act," an amendment to the Telecom
bill, declared unconstitutional. We also seek a temporary restraining order
against enforcement of the law while the case is under consideration.


Suit is being brought by the American Civil Liberties Union which is
funding the advancement of this case. We, along with the ACLU, the EFF and
several others are plaintiffs in this case because we feel the law would
unfairly affect and chill our electronic publishing efforts, and because we
feel the law violates the 1st amendment to the U.S. constitution.


As newspaper publishers we are strong supporters of full freedom of
expression. ClariNet has always felt that we should not "protect" our
readers from possibly offensive or "indecent" material. Our job is to
deliver you the news. We sometimes even run stories that might not be run
by ordinary print newspapers in the USA because their content might be
offensive. We believe our readership is educated and intelligent and able
to make its own decisions about what to read. We also believe that children
should be able to read our news, and that it is up to their parents to
control their access and educate them about how to deal with material their
parents feel is inappropriate.


We are particularly distressed by this bill for several reasons. We are
against censorship, as stated, but we are particularly frightened at the
suggestion that the electronic press should be subject to restrictions
which would never be allowed or accepted on the paper press. This law
forbids allowing "indecent" material from reaching minors, but such a
restriction has been proven time and time again to be unconstitutional when
applied to publishers of paper books and newspapers.


We fear this sort of law because it declares the electronic press to be
second class press, not protected by the full strength of the 1st
amendment. The government was able to restrict radio and TV stations,
denying them that protection, under the argument that they used the scarce
resource of electromagnetic spectrum, and thus were subject to licencing by
the FCC. No such argument applies here.


We in the digital press are growing. All major newspapers now have online
versions as well, or plan them. Many feel that the online newspapers will
supplant the paper versions in the decades to come, and the digital press
will be "the press" as far as the USA is concerned. Laws like this one
would leave the USA without a mainstream medium that is protected fully by
the 1st amendment. They must be stopped now.


What ClariNet Publishes


For historical reasons, ClariNet also publishes the net's most widely read
free material, the USENET newsgroup rec.humor.funny. While RHF is not part
of ClariNet's paid-subscription electronic newspaper service, ClariNet
sponsors its operation and provides the facilities for its publication and
web server. This publication, dedicated to jokes of all types, has
published and does publish "dirty jokes" which may meet the definition of
"indecent" applied in this new law. To remove all "indecent" jokes would
destroy the newsgroup. Since USENET distribution is entirely outside of our
control, we have no power over whether minors may or may not get access to
dirty jokes.


This law would require all open facilities on USENET to either put in
draconian access controls to stop access by minors, or to "dumb down" to a
level acceptable for children. Open adult discourse would be destroyed.


Abortion


The law also prohibits certain discussions about abortion online,
particularly anything that might tell people how to get an abortion. The
suit is challenging this as well.


The Suit


We'll keep you informed on our main web page and this page on the
progress of the suit. It is expected to go to the U.S. Supreme Court
rapidly. You will also find details on the home pages of the ACLU, the EFF
and other parties participating in the suit. You should also support the
EFF's Blue Ribbon campaign for free expression online.


We encourage you to contribute to the ACLU and other public organizations
supporting this effort. ClariNet, in addition to being a plaintiff, is
making a donation to the ACLU to support them in this effort, but our
donation will cover but a tiny fraction of the cost of doing this work.
Your help is needed as well. We are confident that the courts will see this
law as onerous and unconstitutional but this doesn't happen all by itself.


What You can Do


   * Contribute to the ACLU and the EFF
   * If in the USA, write your representatives, senators and the White
     House to protest this law. See the EFF pages for how to do this. We
     advise writing, phoning or faxing rather than E-mail. Remind them it's
     more than just netheads against this law.
   * If you are a ClariNet subscriber, read clari.net.info,
     clari.net.announce and clari.tw.new_media, for coverage of the story
     and our involvement.
   * Support all the plaintiffs, but particularly the ACLU, and other
     online initiatives against this law.
   * Support the blue ribbon campaign.
   * Fight similar laws in other countries.