In This Article
Subscribe to Technology Updates
Appeals Court Affirms Child Online Protection Act Is Unconstitutional
July 23, 2008 5:49 PM
by
Liz Colville
A federal appeals court ruled that the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) of 1998, intended to protect children from adult content online, is unconstitutional.
Email This30-Second Summary
The court’s decision upholds a lower court ruling that COPA, created to “protect children from sexual material and other objectionable content on the Internet,” is “unconstitutionally overly broad and vague.”
COPA was created in 1998 but has never taken effect; the court of appeals’ ruling is “the latest twist in a decade-long battle” over the legislation, writes the San Francisco Chronicle.
The court of appeals suggested that filters, enforced on federally funded library computers since 2003 under the similarly titled Child Internet Protection Act, are a better means of protecting children from adult or otherwise inappropriate content.
COPA has already reached the Supreme Court and could be headed back there, the Chronicle suggests. In 2004, the Court upheld a previous ruling that COPA violates the First Amendment.
The case was sent back to the lower courts because the Supreme Court believed “there may have been important technological advances in the five years since” COPA was first brought to the court by the ACLU and other plaintiffs.
Family advocates are concerned that the law’s delays in the courts are happening as larger numbers of children are accessing pornography online. Daniel Weiss of Focus on the Family has remarked that businesses, as well as parents and family advocacy groups, must take some responsibility for the problem in light of legislative delays.
COPA was created in 1998 but has never taken effect; the court of appeals’ ruling is “the latest twist in a decade-long battle” over the legislation, writes the San Francisco Chronicle.
The court of appeals suggested that filters, enforced on federally funded library computers since 2003 under the similarly titled Child Internet Protection Act, are a better means of protecting children from adult or otherwise inappropriate content.
COPA has already reached the Supreme Court and could be headed back there, the Chronicle suggests. In 2004, the Court upheld a previous ruling that COPA violates the First Amendment.
The case was sent back to the lower courts because the Supreme Court believed “there may have been important technological advances in the five years since” COPA was first brought to the court by the ACLU and other plaintiffs.
Family advocates are concerned that the law’s delays in the courts are happening as larger numbers of children are accessing pornography online. Daniel Weiss of Focus on the Family has remarked that businesses, as well as parents and family advocacy groups, must take some responsibility for the problem in light of legislative delays.
Headline Link: ‘Court affirms online content law unconstitutional’
The court of appeals ruled that COPA “violates the First Amendment because filtering technologies and other parental control tools offer a less restrictive way to protect children from inappropriate content online,” writes the San Francisco Chronicle. John Morris of the Center for Democracy & Technology suggested that filters “provide a more effective way to protect children since they can block objectionable Web sites that are based overseas,” outside the reach of U.S. laws.
Source: San Francisco Chronicle
Background: Child protection and the Internet
In 1997, provisions of the Communications Decency Act were struck down by the Supreme Court in Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union. The provisions included the outlaw of “‘knowing’ transmission of ‘obscene or indecent’ messages to recipients under age eighteen.” The court ruled that the “law’s restrictions were too broad, and encroached on the constitutional rights of computer users.”
Source: FindLaw
In the 2003 case United States v. American Library Association, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Child Internet Protection Act, which stipulates that public libraries receiving federal funding for Internet access must install software that blocks adult content. “A public library does not acquire Internet terminals in order to create a public forum for Web publishers to express themselves,” the majority stated, but rather to facilitate “research, learning, and recreational pursuits.”
Source: The Center for Democracy & Technology
In 2004, the fight against COPA reached the Supreme Court, which upheld an earlier ruling that the law violated the First Amendment. But the 5–4 majority led by Justice Anthony Kennedy sent the case back to the lower courts to review technological advancements made in the years since the law was first created.
Source: Associated Press (via First Amendment Center)
Opinions & Analysis: COPA and online safety
The ACLU, which has represented a number of clients ranging from online magazine editors to sexual health educators in cases against COPA, noted on its blog in June that the government’s justification of COPA seems hinged on the fact that only about half of parents use filters to protect their children from online content. The “implicit assumption seems to be that parents who choose not to filter their children’s Internet use are so irresponsible that the federal government needs to step in.”
Source: ACLU Blog
Following the district court decision on COPA in 2007, Daniel Weiss of the group Focus on the Family remarked to Information Week, “Our concern is, as it always has been, that, as this was tied up in the courts, children are continuing to be harmed by pornography online and in great numbers.” Weiss added that “businesses, especially Internet companies, should take some responsibility for the problem.” Focus on the Family educates parents about protecting their children from harmful online content.
Source: Information Week
Related Topic: Growing number of tweens online
PC Magazine reported July 22 on a study by Cox Communications and the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, which shows that despite better communication with parents, “children are still willing to talk to strangers on IM, post personal information about themselves on social networking sites, or be the target of online bullying.” On the other hand, the study found that only 2 percent of children surveyed are given no online restrictions by their parents.
Source: PC Magazine
Reference: The appeals court decision, Internet security guide
The court of appeals’ July 22 decision upheld the district court decision of 2007 that COPA is “impermissibly overbroad and vague,” that it “is not narrowly tailored to advance the Government’s compelling interest in protecting children from harmful material on the World Wide Web,” and that “there are less restrictive, equally effective alternatives” to the law.
Source: The Center for Democracy & Technology
FindingDulcinea’s Web Guide to Internet Security covers how to keep kids safe online, as well as privacy protection, wireless security, virus protection and online security basics. The section on kids’ online safety contains numerous reputable links to advocacy groups, government organizations and paid services.
Source: findingDulcinea
© 2008 Dulcinea Media, Inc.
