|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Utah governor signs Net-porn bill
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 09:03:17AM -0800, Roy said something to the effect of: > > CNET's extract is wrong. > > The article states > > The measure, SB 260, says: "Upon request by a consumer, a service > provider may not transmit material from a content provider site listed > on the adult content registry." Isn't that demanding that an ISP provide, free of charge, a managed firewall service? I might be expecting too much, but wouldn't it stand to reason that link-chasing and downloading inherently constitute a request *to* receive content? At the risk of sounding like a proponent for public indecency <snicker> if Junior or Hubby or Wifey or whomever is hoarding porn and "must be protected/stopped/brought back into the fold", I don't think it's really the responsibility of the ISP to care. Note to Utah (tm)*: the pervasion of perversion is nigh! ;) Buy a firewall and keep an eye on your kids. Neither the schools nor the ISPs are meant to raise them. bah, --ra *UT is OK with me. The disgruntled ramblings in here refer only to those whining to the ISPs to save them from their own Internet connection. > > Its entirely voluntary on the part of the consumer. > > Roy Engehausen > > Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote: > > >C|Net: > > > >"Utah's governor signed a bill on Monday that would > >require Internet providers to block Web sites deemed > >pornographic and could also target e-mail providers > >and search engines." > > > >http://news.com.com/Utah+governor+signs+Net-porn+bill/2100-1028_3-5629067.html?tag=nefd.top > > > >- ferg > > > >-- > >"Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson > >Engineering Architecture for the Internet > >[email protected] or [email protected] > > > > -- k. rachael treu, CISSP [email protected] ..quis custodiet ipsos custodes?.. (this email has been brought to you by the letters 'v' and 'i'.)
|