WASHINGTON--Congress remains reluctant to rewrite copyright law in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision on file-swapping--but Internet pornography on peer-to-peer networks is likely to be a legislative target this fall.
At a hearing convened Thursday by the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said that she and a bipartisan group of senators were "very concerned" that peer-to-peer software makers were not taking "active steps" to stop copyright infringement by filtering pornography from minors using the software.
"If you don't move to protect copyright, if you don't move to protect our children, it's not going to sit well," Boxer said.
Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who chairs the committee, said he would be holding a hearing this fall geared toward illegal access to pornography through peer-to-peer software.
"We're going to get specific about this, pornography over the Internet," Stevens said. "People tell me we can't do anything about it. I don't believe that."
Both Boxer and Stevens indicated that they would continue to seek legislation related to requiring filters on peer-to-peer software clients.
But Adam Eisgrau, executive director of P2P United, told the senators that any claim of a "technological magic bullet" to filter out illicit content "is simply false."
Read the Rest:
Read the complete article
that's gay
told ya America was founded by Prudes
but that guy hasen't even had sex before
:icon_puke
THE CHILDREN THE CHILDREN o c'mon by the time they are 10 they will already be getting sexual education!
No one forces anyone to use p2p software, no one forces you to download porn.
I thought it was the Parents job to control there carpet rats. Not congress trying to trash my adult fun.
Not all America's are prudes. Its' just a few in goverment working to opress us all in the name of Protecting some kid from whatever.
Omgporn
Its Free Online
Holy Crap Ban The Internet
yeh...it has NOTHING to do with the children. They just want the tax money from porn...and they can't get it with P2P free porn.
Notice how she mentions copyright before children. Doesn't look like this one is really about porn, although I'm sure they'd like to get rid of that too (fat chance).Originally Posted by From the article
"That sounded like a prayer....A prayer....in a public school?!
God has no place within these walls, just like facts have no
place within organized religion!"
I really hate this. Year by year we're becoming more and more, a country for children, where the adults have to have special consideration to be adults.
This is an adult world. Parents are solely responsible for their children, and if childred are getting their hands on porn or other things they aren't allowed to have, the parents need to be taken to task. Not everyone else.
If I wanted to live in a child-oriented world, I'd be living at Neverland right now. (well, maybe not, but you peeps get my drift)
Ha this ship is already sinking they wont get anywhere with this the UNITEDSTATES DOES NOT OWN THE WORLD WIDE WEB what retards or do they? Please take no offense to this but fuck the childern i want my god damned porn i can live with out mp3s but porn no ones touching my porn!
porno is not protected under the constitution its falls under obscenity exception. The US government has the right to regulate companies that do business in the US, the international arguement here fails because of the fact that the p2p company itself resides in the US or does business within the US. So congress even if you dont agree with it are acting within their responisbilities here.
Besides its not like any filter will be able to remove anything 100% and any regulation might not withstand a court challange.
Funny you should mention 'retard'...
They weren't talking about the W3... the W3, has been fairly cooperative with self-regulating already, with packages such as NetNanny et al, having reasonable success with censoring content where their children were concerned...
They were talking about P2P... P2P != W3
Get with the program.
P2P is a different beast when it comes to regulating content. W3 sites have control over the content that passes through their sites. P2P, has none of that control, as it is all of the users who supply content. All the companies who sell the P2P programs see are the hashs, and filenames, and that's it. They'd have to download every file available from every computer in order to screen content passing through their P2P system, and that's just unworkable.
Say, they try to block the transfer of a certain image file. They could try it by the filename, but there are tons of pictures with the same filename. No way to be certain you're only blocking infringing content.
Say, they try to block the transfer by the file's hash. They theoretically could do that, but all it takes is a change of a single bit in the file, and you got a new hash, and its back in business.
On top of that, the P2P programs would have to have so much data on all of the fringing hash's, you'd need to buy a 1Tb drive just to hold the hash file, and wait a week while the P2P app compared the file's hash to the blacklist every time.
The guy with the P2P organization was right when he told the politicos that that kind of control was just unworkable, and there was no magic bullet possible.
Yea ive seen shit like this on my local news and ill add you really have to be looking for a porn site to find a free one!! Fuck you media get educated!! www.the hun.comAs for p2p ive never accidentaly downloaded pron.
Stopping this shit,would start at home and getting yourself educated! Dumb as*es!!!!!!!
What are all the perverts going to do if they take away their free porn?
http://www.torrentbytes.net
http://www.filelist.org
http://www.byteem.org <~thats what they will do!!
Porno *is* protected by the constitution. There is a three prong test for deeming something "obscene."
Porn slides in under artistic value. Cursing (in some situations) literary, flag burning political, and I have yet to think of a one that slides with scientific. Maybe study of animal sex rituals? *shrugs* But anyway, porn is protected, but prohibited to minors.(a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, [Roth, supra, at 489,]
(b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and
(c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. If a state obscenity law is thus limited, First Amendment values are adequately protected by ultimate independent appellate review of constitutional claims when necessary. [Pp. 24-25.]
I'm not even supposed to be here today!
I expected better prioritization of issues from Barbera Boxer.
I guess she realized that fighting republican election fraud is too hard (if not impossible)
||| = + |-|---------No longer lurking...
m e t h o d-----...Target aquired: BREIN
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks