ISPs worry that Net safety bills would outlaw e-mail
Two new federal proposals that Republican supporters claim will protect children have alarmed Internet companies, who say the measures could make it a crime to provide e-mail.
The bills, each named the Internet Safety Act and announced at a press conference on Thursday, have mostly attracted attention for a sweeping requirement saying broadband providers and Wi-Fi access points must keep records on users for two years.
Another section of the legislation, however, is numbered 1960B. It says anyone employed at a provider who "knowingly engages in any conduct the provider knows or has reason to believe facilitates access to, or the possession of, child pornography" will be fined and imprisoned for not more than 10 years.
For Internet firms, the quandary is this: The mere provision of e-mail, electronic storage, cloud-computing services, and social-networking sites could be viewed as an act that "facilitates access to" illegal content, especially if the provider knows that some users in the past have been less than law-abiding. (And the threat of arrest, indictment, and imprisonment makes them unwilling to hope prosecutors interpret the language conservatively.)
"The legislation, as currently drafted, appears to raise the specter of imputing criminal liability on ISPs and others for the provision of routine services, such as e-mail," said Kate Dean, executive director of the U.S. Internet Service Provider Association, or US ISPA.
US ISPA's members include Verizon, Comcast, AOL, AT&T, and EarthLink.
(The relevant text explicitly mentions e-mail: "Whoever, being an Internet content hosting provider or e-mail service provider, knowingly engages in any conduct the provider knows or has reason to believe facilitates access to, or the possession of, child pornography...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.")
The pair of Texas Republicans who announced the proposal at a press conference on Thursday--Rep. Lamar Smith, the ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee, and Sen. John Cornyn--said it's necessary to protect children online. The Internet's "limitless nature offers anonymity that has opened the door to criminals looking to harm innocent children," Cornyn said.
In an opinion article published in the Dallas Morning News on Thursday, Smith defended his legislation by saying, "How many times have we seen TV detectives seek call logs of a suspect in order to determine who he has been talking to? What if the telephone companies simply said to the detectives, 'Sorry, we get rid of that information after 24 hours?'"
Neither Smith nor Cornyn responded to repeated inquiries from CNET News on Friday.
Two bills have been introduced so far--S.436 in the Senate and HR 1076 in the House. Each of the bills is titled "Internet Stopping Adults Facilitating the Exploitation of Today's Youth Act," or Internet Safety Act.
Declan McCullagh, CNET News' chief political correspondent, chronicles the intersection of politics and technology. He has covered politics, technology, and Washington, D.C., for more than a decade, which has turned him into an iconoclast and a skeptic of anyone who says, "We oughta have a new federal law against this." E-mail Declan. 





2. Texans speak English with a more annoying accent.
3. Texas does not have enough money to bankroll our recovery.
1. W
2. Robert Allen Stanford
3. Enron
4. Big hair
5. Bad manners, especially abroad (which to Texans means everywhere outside of Texas)
6. Music (OK this one may be a toss-up).
...gymnastics! Can you picture one of those big-boned, beer-fed Texas heifers on a balance beam? Or the clanking of all that fake jewelry on the approach to the vault? How about the Max Factor Pan-Cake makeup smeared all over the floor exercise mat? I don't even want to think about the flapping of fringes and cellulite on the uneven bars.
Anyone else wanna play?
Zhu Bajie
hell i feel sorry for you people that have never done drugs you are missing out.
Just like the Republican Govs threat to not take any stim. money, they are playing to an easily manipulated base.
They bring up a ridiculous bill like this and when the reasonable members of Congress oppose it, they get to rant about how the Liberal Democrats are opposed to protecting children while protecting child abusers
There's no great anti-Constitutional conspiracy, just moronic politics from an impotent bunch of has-beens.
Religion will come up, too. Their favorite Brand X Protestants want to be a sort of state church.
I can see what they're attempting to do. They want to put liability on the service providers (ISPs in particular) so that they have a vested interest in keeping the tubes a little cleaner. Too bad they're doing it in grand fascist fashion. In the guise of Reaganish morality of course.
Or at least, it better not.
If it does, beat it into their thick heads that it CAN'T work.
The internet, nor any regular person can ever handle such a task.
To put it in other words, it is like jailing the victim of a house break in because they never asked the name, address and phone number of the robber!
Since all of these can be used in the creation of a pornographic image of a child, they must go away as well, right? Well, at least according to these two idiots from Texas they do.
I agree, child pornography is a horrible thing, but let's pay a little attention to what Bills we pass this time around.
The car salesman is guilty of bank robbery because the car was used to get away
The department store clerk is guilty of murder because the kitchen knife was used to kill someone
The grocery store clerk is guily of assult because a customer injured someone with a household chemical.
Need I go on?
I have no problem protecting my children from harmful Internet sites - the computer is used only where I can see what they are doing.
child porn will always exist and there is nothing what you can do against it
stupid laws, America must grow up and out of these silly uber security measures
i feel sorry for you people
it must suck
www.aclu.org
Zhu Bajie
We have been taken to a point of Texas being the fear factory of the world. "W" should feel right back at home.
Hey America, time to wake up while we can still be called Americans.
Just wait for the tag-line: "You're either for this law, or for exploiting children!"
- by Dalkorian February 23, 2009 9:08 AM PST
- THIS is why retardicans no longer have any real power in our government. We took our government back because retardicans are more dangerous than terrorists are - in fact I'd argue that retardicans ARE terrorists!
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (40 Comments)