It's decision time on Net free speech

(continued from previous page)

The plaintiffs also focused on the issue of deciding who would have jurisdiction over Internet content. They claimed that 50 percent of sexual content on the Web is posted overseas in countries not subject to American laws. Even within the United States, the judges asked Coppolino, who would have jurisdiction over deciding what is indecent material?

"Indecency will be judged on a community basis where indecency is an issue," Coppolino said. But when asked who would decide that question, Coppolino replied: "There is no indication that you're subject to prosecution where your site is."

The plaintiffs also reminded the judges of testimony about new parental control software and other filtering technology like the PICS standard approved this week by the World Wide Web Consortium. The ALA's Ennis argued that such technology is not only sufficient to let parents police Net content themselves, but also will still be necessary if the law remains in effect.

"This law gives the wrong signal to parents. The law says parents don't need to worry, but in fact parents do need to worry. They will learn that they have effective devices, but they have to use them. This act does nothing, or at most a marginal amount, to protect children from indecent speech, and that marginal benefit comes at the expense of taking away constitutional rights from adults," Ennis said.

Related stories:
Last testimony heard in CDA trial
CDA judges shown ease of surfing
CDA judges get look at Net diversity
The CDA on trial
The Net testifies at CDA trial
Abortion provision of CDA under attack
Indecent is in, obscene is out
Censoring cybersmut: what happens now?
Will you be censored?
Browsers to help parents monitor Net