North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block "harmful" sites

  • From: Richard Irving
  • Date: Fri Mar 04 11:28:46 2005 
Roy Engehausen wrote:

You missed a very important line in the article:

"Internet providers in Utah must offer their customers a way to disable access to sites on the list or face felony charges."

In other words you must provide a mechanism for a customer to "opt-in" to a filter. Doesn't sound illegal to force an ISP to provide a feature.
  I have a way. You want the Internet sites on this list blocked,
-here-, your account is now _disabled_.

You won't -ever- have to worry about accessing sites you don't like.

  :P

  This is another attempt to legislate something that
can be solved, or should be solved, with technology.

 After all, we have -all- seen how well the anti-UCE laws
have worked.

  * cough *

  The last 5 years of politics, have set a record low,
in my book.

  This law ranks right up there, with the law recently passed
in one state,  (in the past year, and, of course, a Red State)
that declared same sex couples living together,
instead of being married, as criminals, subject to a fine,
and incarceration.

  Did someone spike the legislative punch bowl, or _what_ ?



Roy

Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:


"The Utah governor is deciding whether to sign a
bill that would require Internet providers to block
Web sites deemed pornographic and that could also
target e-mail providers and search engines."

http://news.com.com/Utah+governor+weighs+antiporn+proposal/2100-1028_3-5598912.html?tag=nefd.top

Someone might consider pointing them to the law from the state of PA that
did similar things... Then point them at the overturning of that law.