[online-e] US Telcom Reform Act

[steve@isys.hu (Steven Carlson)]

Hello All -

I found this today on the Computer Underground Digest list (CuD)
<http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest>, and thought it might be of interest
some of you.

The message below talks about the current debate in the US Congress about
regulating "indecent speech" on the Internet. The debate is interesting to
us, because European governments and the EU are watching US legislation,
and may follow the US example.

My question to you: What is your government doing to regulate Internet?
What do you fear they will do? And finally, what can we do?


=steve=

--
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 95 22:29:01 PST
From: jblumen@interramp.com
Subject: File 6--The Great Decency Fake-out

 The Great Decency Fake-out

Congressmen and senators are meeting with each other right now
to decide which of two competing versions of the Telcom Reform Act
should be adopted as law. Whichever they choose, they will be able
to send you to prison for saying "Fuck" on the Internet.

We got to this serious and dangerous pass by way of a five act
comedy.

Act I: June. Senator Exon waved his blue book of pornography on the
Senate floor, frothing at the mouth about "pornographers, pedophiles
and predators." The Senate passed the Communications Decency
Act (CDA) by a vote of 84-16, banning unspecified "indecent" speech
online. Numerous commentators point out that the CDA is
ridiculously vague and would certainly ban speech that is
perfectly legal offline.

Act II: June. White knight and futurist Newt Gingrich goes on TV and
announces that the CDA is unconstitutional. Everyone breathes a
sigh of relief because it is well known that this man runs the
House with an iron hand--the CDA will not get through.

Act III: August. The House passes its version of the Reform Act.
True to Gingrich's word, the CDA never even comes up for
consideration. Instead, the unusual Cox-Wyden act is adopted, vaguely but
gloriously praising the Internet as a method of communication,
education and community building but not actually implementing
any legal measures. Spectators declare victory--Gingrich has killed
the CDA.

Act IV: August. The discovery is made that a last minute "manager's
mark amendment" added to the Reform Act would ban the depiction or
description of sexual or excretory organs or functions online.
Most of the Congressmen voting in favor of the final version of
the bill don't even know it's there. No-one's name is on it, no-one
knows how it got there. Fewer still understand that this is the
exact language Congress passed into law some years ago to define
indecency on television.

Act V is happening now. The conference committee is looking to
create a compromise version of the Act. Whether it adopts the
CDA (unlikely) or the manager's mark version, it will become illegal
to say anything on the Net you couldn't say on the radio or TV.
The phrase "Fuck the Telcom Reform Act" would get me sent to
prison.

Question: If Gingrich runs the House as tightly as they say, could
this have possibly happened without his knowing? Or have we just
witnessed the Great Decency Fake-out, the ceremonial death of the
CDA and its quiet replacement with something equally lethal?
Why, if the Cox-Wyden bill opposes the F.C.C.'s intervention in the
Internet, did the House adopt a television-style decency standard?

The only reason the Supreme Court has permitted greater regulation of
broadcast media than print is because of scarcity: the government
is already involved in allocating bandwidth, so it's not a big step
to regulating content. THIS IS THE WRONG METAPHOR FOR THE INTERNET.
The net is a constellation of printing presses and bookshops and
should be regulated like print media. The indecency standard
adopted by the manager's mark amendment would be clearly
unconstitutional if applied to print media. Let's not let the
Congress put one across on us by applying a more restrictive standard
to the Internet.

Where are the petitions, the mobilization, the concern? The
manager's mark amendment is more dangerous than the CDA,
which had two strikes against it: it was unconstitutionally vague,
and it attempted to apply broadcast standards to the Net. The
manager's mark amendment avoids the vagueness problem. WRITE YOUR
CONGRESSPERSON NOW, especially if he or she is on the conference
committee (CuD has printed the list in a recent issue). Or write to
Mr. Gingrich at georgia6@hr.house.gov.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Carlson                                        http://www.isys.hu
iSYS Hungary                                          info@isys.hu
steve@isys.hu

"One person with a belief is equal to a force of ninety-nine who only
have an interest."  -  John Stuart Mill



*  The Online Europe Development list is also available in digest form. *
*  Send a message to <majordomo@isys.hu> with no subject and the        *
*  following two command lines: unsubscribe online-europe               *
*                               subscribe online-europe-digest          *
*  For human intervention <steve@isys.hu>                               *
*  WWW archive available at <http://www.isys.hu/online-europe/>         *