Source
Automatically imported from: http://commons.somewhere.com:80/rre/1996/CDA.trial.bulletin.html
Content
This web service brought to you by Somewhere.Com, LLC.
CDA trial bulletin
``` [I won't forward these trial bulletins to the list regularly.]
---
This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). Send any replies to the original author, listed in the From: field below. You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" command. For information on RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, send an empty message to rre-help@weber.ucsd.edu
---
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:36:03 -0800 From: telstar@wired.com (--Todd Lappin-->) To: telstar@wired.com Subject: LAWSUIT: Trial Bulletin 3/21/96
Greetings!
Things finally got underway today in Philadelphia, as a panel of three Federal judges began hearing testimony in connection with efforts to have the Communications Decency Act ruled unconstitutional.
According to conversations I had this afternoon with several folks who were present in the courtroom, the judges seemed very interested in learning more about how the Internet works, and how it can be used to facilitate parental empowerment. These are encouraging signs.
More detail follows in the two-part CIEC Trial Bulletin I've included below.
Work the network!
--Todd Lappin--> Section Editor WIRED Magazine
---
THIS IS THE AFTERNOON UPDATE: ----------------------------------------------------------------- _______ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ |__ __| (_) | | | _ \ | | | | | (_) | |_ __ _ __ _| | | |_) |_ _| | | ___| |_ _ _ __ | | '__| |/ _` | | | _ <| | | | | |/ _ \ __| | '_ \ | | | | | (_| | | | |_) | |_| | | | __/ |_| | | | | ||| |_|\__,|_| |____/ \__,|_|_|\___|\__|_|_| |_|
Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition Trial Update No. 4 Afternoon Update - March 21, 1996 1:00 pm ET ----------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.cdt.org/ciec/ ciec-info@cdt.org ----------------------------------------------------------------- CIEC UPDATES intended for members of the Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition. CIEC Updates are written and edited by the Center for Democracy and Technology (http://www.cdt.org). This document may be reposted as long as it remains in total. ------------------------------------------------------------------
30,000 Netizens Vs. U.S. Department of Justice. The Fight To Save Free Speech Online Contents:
* Afternoon Update - Live from the Courtroom in Philadelphia
INTERNET 101 - WHAT IS THE NET AND HOW DOES IT WORK?
* More Information on CIEC and the Center for Democracy and Technology
---
Live from the courtroom in Philadelphia...
INTERNET 101 -- WHAT IS THE NET AND HOW DOES IT WORK?
The Court has just taken a recess for lunch. This morning, the Court heard testimony from Scott Bradner (of Harvard University and the IETF), who was called on behalf of the Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition. Bradner, who answered questions posed by the Justice Department, gave he court a 3 hour overview of the nature of the Internet and how it functions.
Bradner gave a detailed overview of the Internet standards setting processes, and then described the various functions available online, including the World Wide Web, Usenet Newsgroups, ftp, telnet, and electronic mail. Throughout his testimony, Bradner illustrated to the court that the Internet is a vast, decentralized global network containing information on a huge variety of subjects, from Newsgroups on Formula One auto-racing to the catalogues of the Harvard Library.
When outlining the various ways users can access information on the Internet, Bradner stressed that users have tremendous control over the material they access. Bradner's testimony illustrated to the court that if a user wants to access information on a particular subject, they must seek out that information and affirmatively request it before any information is provided. The Government did not attempt to refute this claim, nor did they present any evidence to the contrary.
The 3 judges were actively involved in this morning's testimony, and asked many questions which indicated that, despite the flurry of acronyms and technical details Bradner presented, they understand the basic nature of the Internet as presented today.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR THE CASE?
While it is obviously still far too early to draw any conclusions about the outcome of this case, this morning's testimony was an important first step in showing the court that the Internet is a unique communications technology distinct from mass media such as Radio and TV. AS you know, this argument is a critical piece of the CIEC challenge. Bradner's testimony showed that, while the Internet is ubiquitous network accessible from virtually anywhere, it is not, as the Justice Department seeks to show, "pervasive" in the same way as traditional mass media.
Testimony will resume at 1:30 pm with Ann Duvall, President of SurfWatch Software (and another CIEC witness). Using the Net.connection installed in the court, Ann will demonstrate the World Wide Web and illustrate how SurfWatch functions. Scott Bradner will return tomorrow (Friday 3/22) morning for follow-up questions by CIEC attorneys.
THIS IS THE EVENING UPDATE:
---
_______ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ |__ __| (_) | | | _ \ | | | | | (_) | |_ __ _ __ _| | | |_) |_ _| | | ___| |_ _ _ __ | | '__| |/ _` | | | _ <| | | | | |/ _ \ __| | '_ \ | | | | | (_| | | | |_) | |_| | | | __/ |_| | | | | ||| |_|\__,|_| |____/ \__,|_|_|\___|\__|_|_| |_|
Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition Trial Update No. 5 Evening Update - March 21, 1996 7:00 pm ET ----------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.cdt.org/ciec/ ciec-info@cdt.org ----------------------------------------------------------------- CIEC UPDATES intended for members of the Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition. CIEC Updates are written and edited by the Center for Democracy and Technology (http://www.cdt.org). This document may be reposted as long as it remains in total. ------------------------------------------------------------------
30,000 Netizens Vs. U.S. Department of Justice. The Fight To Save Free Speech Online Contents:
* Evening Update - Recap of Afternoon Testimony + Surfing the Net from the Federal Court+ The Impact of the CDA on Small, Independent Content Providers* More Information on CIEC and the Center for Democracy and Technology
---
(1) EVENING UPDATE - SURFING THE NET FROM THE COURTROOM
The Court has recessed for the day after a long day of education on the nature of the Internet, the effectiveness of parental control software, and testimony on the potential impact of the Communications Decency Act on small, independent content providers. Testimony resumes at 9:30 am ET Friday March 22.
After hearing about the workings of the Internet from Scott Bradner of the IETF this morning (see CIEC Afternoon Edition 3/21), the Court was given a visual demonstration of the World Wide Web by SurfWatch's Ann Duvall. After briefly describing the Internet and the basic steps one must take to get online (including purchasing a computer and modem, and subscribing to an Internet Service Provider or Online Service), Duvall logged on and took the Court on a trip around the Net. Duvall visited a site sponsored by the City of Philadelphia (the setting of the trial) and checked the schedule for upcoming Phillies games, then jumped to London for a quick tour of a Museum before returning to the United States for a demonstration of Yahoo's new site for Kids (yahooligans). She also showed the court how her daughter had found information on Fragile X syndrome for a research paper.
Duvall then illustrated the effectiveness of SurfWatch, and parental control technology generally, by attempting to access several adult oriented sites (including Penthouse Magazine) with SurfWatch engaged. She also illustrated how SurfWatch blocks attempts to search for terms like "sexy" and "erotica" using common search engines. Each attempt was greated with a "blocked by SurfWatch" message.
Despite expectations that the Justice Department might attempt to use the Internet demonstration to show that some sexually explicit Internet sites may not be blocked by SurfWatch, the DOJ attorneys did not do so, and offered no examples of sexually explicit sites to the Court. Instead, they concentrated their efforts on the number of sites SurfWatch blocks (approximately 5000, plus key words like "sex") in an apparent attempt to show that there is are a large number of such sites on the Net. They also suggested SurfWatch may not be effective because sites on the Internet change frequently and new sites regularly come on line.
The Judges appeared extremely interested in Duvall's testimony, and asked a number of questions. They seemed particularly taken with the demonstration of the World Wide Web and the variety of information available. In an important question wich may help to illustrate the potential weeknesses of the CDA, Judge Dalzel focused on Duvall's statement that approximately 30% of the sites SurfWatch blocks are outside the United States.
SMALL, INDEPENDENT CONTENT PROVIDERS WILL SUFFER UNDER THE CDA
The Court next heard from Kiyoshi Kuromiya, Director of the Critical Path AIDS Project. Kuroimya, called by the ACLU attorneys, testified that he maintains a World Wide Web site which contains information on how to avoid the AIDS virus and other sexually transmitted diseases. Kuromiya stated that some of the materials on his site use explicit terms which may violated the "indecency" and "patently offensive" provisions of the CDA. In response to a question from Judge Dalzel, Kuromiya stated that he would not want to alter the materials he posts, or deny access to the site, in order to avoid prosecution under the CDA.
The Court also heard form Patricia Warren an author and publisher who maintains a Web site containing excerpts from her books, some of which deal with Gay and Lesbian subject matter. Warren stated that she fears prosecution under the CDA because some in the United States consider the subject matter she addresses to be 'indecent'. During her testimony, one of the Judges, apparently understanding the vast potential of the Internet to make every user a publisher, asked if it is easier to publish a magazine online than in printed form. Warren responded by suggesting that because distribution and production costs are significantly lower on the Net, publishing online is an important outlet for small publishers with limited resources.
Neither Kuromiya or Warren were cross examined by the Justice Department.
Testimony resumes tomorrow with Scott Bradner, who had to leave early today. Witnesses expected to testify also include Donna Hoffman, of Vanderbeldt University. Situation permitting, we will post a summary of tomorrow's testimony starting in the afternoon. Please continue to check the CIEC web page for updates (http://www.cdt.org/ciec/)
---
For More Information
For more information on the CIEC challenge, including the text of the complaint and other relevant materials:- World Wide Web -- http://www.cdt.org/ciec/- General Information about CIEC -- ciec-info@cdt.org- Copy of the Complaint -- ciec-docs@cdt.org- Specific Questions Regarding the Coalition, incuding Press Inquiries -- ciec@cdt.org- General information about the Center for Democracy and Technology -- info@cdt.org
###
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+- This transmission was brought to you by....
THE CDA INFORMATION NETWORK
The CDA Information Network is a moderated distribution list providing
up-to-the-minute bulletins and background on efforts to overturn the
Communications Decency Act. To subscribe, send email to
WARNING: This is not a test! WARNING: This is not a drill! +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+- ```
This web service brought to you by Somewhere.Com, LLC.