nanog mailing list archives

Re: Utah governor signs Net-porn bill


From: Scott Call <scall () devolution com>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:29:20 -0800 (PST)


On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 Michael.Dillon () radianz com wrote:


that's EASY: there is hyperconcern for the welfare of
children in Utah,

Finally, someone who recognizes what this bill is
all about. It merely asks ISPs to provide parents
with a filtering tool that cannot be overridden by
their children because the process of filtering takes
place entirely outside the home.

To Quote Peter Tolan (Cowriter of the TV Show "Rescue me") on another censorship issue: "The idea that government feels they have to regulate this stuff because the people they're governing can't turn it off is insulting"

Why is it the ISP's responsibility to assume an operational burden of enforcing the religious morality of one group? I think the phrase "Chilling effect" has been used in this thread previously, and I believe it was apt.

If there's a demand to an alternative internet service by, for example, Mormons, why not start an ISP with filtering, and offer it? Niche businesses service narrow segments of the market have been very successful, even if they charge slightly more, based on their specialized appeal.

If aol/comcast/rboc/etc see that they are loosing customers to competition, they may choose to offer similar services or choose to let the customers go.



Current thread: