China was first:
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-Ne...9901290528654/
Britts is working on it:
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...,4980012.story
USA will follow:
http://www.businessinsider.com/coica-2010-12
- Guest110511
- 12-30-2010, 11:54 PM
- charlestudor2005
- 12-31-2010, 09:23 AM
The thrust of the article about the US is in this paragraph:
The article also mentions Wikileaks. I find this kind of censorship to be more likely, especially if it can be tied to national security under the Patriot Act. But then, it would also be challengable in court. The problem with cases like Wikileaks is that by the time it gets to court, the "secrets" are no longer secret.
Finally, I think we have seen that censorship of porn is impossible. However, the caveat would be child porn. If anything is possible, it is with regard to child porn.
IMHO, the First Amendment would make this kind of action on the government's part extremely doubtful.COICA would induce all Internet Service Providers, including the largest like Comcast and Verizon, to start censoring sites on a pair of blacklists: one published and maintained by the Department of Justice without judicial oversight, and the other by the Attorney General. Sites that have been in the past or could today be considered for these lists include Ebay, YouTube, Dropbox, Facebook, SoundCloud, Veoh, Rapidshare and many other popular Internet websites. A site is a potential target for these lists if infringement, or linking to infringement, might be considered “central” to the site. Worse yet, getting on the list is easy but getting off could be quite difficult as it’s not clear what process will be in place to get off the list, even when a listing is done in error. The consequences for a law-abiding business of being blacklisted would be extremely dire.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/coica...#ixzz19hqpqvVG
The article also mentions Wikileaks. I find this kind of censorship to be more likely, especially if it can be tied to national security under the Patriot Act. But then, it would also be challengable in court. The problem with cases like Wikileaks is that by the time it gets to court, the "secrets" are no longer secret.
Finally, I think we have seen that censorship of porn is impossible. However, the caveat would be child porn. If anything is possible, it is with regard to child porn.
- missfuntimes
- 12-31-2010, 01:00 PM
NOOOOOOO, They can't take our porn away. What is the world coming to. LOL
But I agree, get rid of the child porn/underage exploitation, that's just wrong!
But I agree, get rid of the child porn/underage exploitation, that's just wrong!
- marco2007
- 01-01-2011, 12:30 AM
The government (both federal and local) uses public safety as an excuse to further restrict our rights and freedoms. That is fine if the primary goal of a country is to provide maximum safety to it's citizens. This country was founded on the belief that individual rights were of upmost importance and the fed government was charged with protecting those rights and was granted limited power over it's citizens. All powers not specifically granted to the federal government were reserved for the states and the people (We The People). Unfortunately, over time, we have allowed the government to restrict and limit our rights to the point that they trample our rights on a regular basis and are rarely challenged.
Recently, the EPA tried to ban the sale of most ammunition, citing the lead as an environmental hazzard. Fortunately their attempt this time was unsuccessful. It is all about control. Control of the citizenry via arms control, the Fairness Doctrine which would give them tighter control over the airwaves, and now tighter control over the internet. They also use the Patriot Act to conduct warrantless searches and monitoring. Not many people realize that federal agents can enter your home without a warrant and conduct a search of the entire premises while you are not home and DO NOT EVEN NEED TO NOTIFY YOU THAT THEY ENTERED YOUR HOME.
The more I learn about conditions in this country the more pissed off I become.
Recently, the EPA tried to ban the sale of most ammunition, citing the lead as an environmental hazzard. Fortunately their attempt this time was unsuccessful. It is all about control. Control of the citizenry via arms control, the Fairness Doctrine which would give them tighter control over the airwaves, and now tighter control over the internet. They also use the Patriot Act to conduct warrantless searches and monitoring. Not many people realize that federal agents can enter your home without a warrant and conduct a search of the entire premises while you are not home and DO NOT EVEN NEED TO NOTIFY YOU THAT THEY ENTERED YOUR HOME.
The more I learn about conditions in this country the more pissed off I become.
- charlestudor2005
- 01-01-2011, 07:17 AM
The government (both federal and local) uses public safety as an excuse to further restrict our rights and freedoms. That is fine if the primary goal of a country is to provide maximum safety to it's citizens. This country was founded on the belief that individual rights were of upmost importance and the fed government was charged with protecting those rights and was granted limited power over it's citizens. All powers not specifically granted to the federal government were reserved for the states and the people (We The People). Unfortunately, over time, we have allowed the government to restrict and limit our rights to the point that they trample our rights on a regular basis and are rarely challenged.@TTH--I think this is fairly well off the mark (i.e. the Constitutional issues mentioned). So much so, I don't even know where to start. You want to give it a shot?
Recently, the EPA tried to ban the sale of most ammunition, citing the lead as an environmental hazzard. Fortunately their attempt this time was unsuccessful. It is all about control. Control of the citizenry via arms control, the Fairness Doctrine which would give them tighter control over the airwaves, and now tighter control over the internet. They also use the Patriot Act to conduct warrantless searches and monitoring. Not many people realize that federal agents can enter your home without a warrant and conduct a search of the entire premises while you are not home and DO NOT EVEN NEED TO NOTIFY YOU THAT THEY ENTERED YOUR HOME.
The more I learn about conditions in this country the more pissed off I become. Originally Posted by marco2007
- Pink Floyd
- 01-01-2011, 08:20 PM
Charles, I sure hope you are right. I wonder what the ACLU has to say about this?
- SneakyCancer
- 01-01-2011, 09:14 PM
they said that about guns....and criminals still get them....so block the porn all they want to try.....it will still be out there. problem is they are not getting the tax revenue from internet porn. another governmental loop hole that they want plugged to line their pocket books.