|
Social Networking Ban
Who ordered this??The House passed the Deleting Online Predators Act (DOPA) by 410 votes to 15. The Act forbids publicly funded organisations, such as schools and libraries, from allowing young people to access sites that have chat rooms or "social networking" elements. Under the proposed law, adults in such institutions can ask for permission to access the sites. "The social networking sites have become, in a sense, a happy hunting ground for child predators," said Republican congressman Michael Fitzpatrick before the vote. The Act prohibits the publicly funded bodies to give children access to sites where they might receive "unlawful sexual advances". The move was condemned by the American Library Association (ALA). "ALA is disappointed by the House's passage of DOPA," said ALA president Leslie Burger. "This unnecessary and overly broad legislation will hinder students' ability to engage in distance learning and block library computer users from accessing a wide array of essential internet applications including instant messaging, email, wikis and blogs. "Under DOPA, people who use library and school computers as their primary conduits to the internet will be unfairly blocked from accessing some of the web's most powerful emerging technologies and learning applications. As libraries are already required to block content that is 'harmful to minors' under the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA), DOPA is redundant and unnecessary legislation." The law suggests that the FCC consider as social networking sites any site that allows users to edit a profile, chat to users or post personal data. Under that loose definition a very large number of sites would qualify, including Amazon.com, which allows users to post lists of preferences and create profiles of authors, eBay, in which each user has a profile which changes as they shop, or any number of major news sites, where users can discuss stories online. See also Larry Magid's Opinion: CBS I think that legislators dare not oppose or even properly discuss any legislation that purports to even slightly reduce child predation, regardless of its flaws. Activists have noticed this, and have used it to ramrod other dubious bills in the last few years, often naming the law after some kid to add further poignancy. Posted by: KBK 2006-08-01 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=161564 |