From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 03:45:18 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Internet Censorware Summit, Clinton to speak, Dec 1-3
In-Reply-To: <v03007808b07e6bfb2ec6@[168.161.105.141]>
Message-ID: <v03007802b07e7407dce0@[168.161.105.141]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



At 09:20 -0800 10/30/97, James S. Tyre wrote:
>Showing my ignorance, what's the "real" censorware summit?

Check out http://www.kidsonline.org/  -- it's a hoot. Praises the CDA as a
"well-intentioned effort to protect children." Grew out of the White
House's kickoff Censorware Summit in July; Clinton is expected to speak at
this one. Scheduled for Dec 1-3 here in DC. Chaired by former Clinton
campaign official and former FTC "protect the children" Commissioner
Christine Varney. (This is not to criticize Varney; I rather like her
personally, but politically, well...)

The Censorware Summit is organized largely by industy groups -- America
Online initially took the lead role -- and sympathetic advocacy groups.
Donna Rice-Hughes (yes that Donna Rice) is heavily involved, as operations
co-chair or something (I forget her real title). Sydney Rubin
(syd@kidsonline.org), a public relations rep for CyberPatrol, is handling
media registration. The Center for Democracy and Technology is hosting the
kidsonline.org web site.

Following is a quote from the web site. Note it talks about how we need
stricter enforcement of obscenity laws -- one of the worst ideas I've heard
in a while. Remember Robert Thomas -- why should S.F. or NYC be subject to
the "community standards" of Tennessee? *sigh*

>The summit will seek to advance the following objectives in accordance with
>Presidential and Congressional statements on Internet use by children:
>
>       Technological Solutions: Encouraging market-based development and
>       deployment of an effective, easy-to-use "digital toolbox" of user
>       empowerment tools which can assist parents and others responsible for
>       children, in shielding those children from material they deem
>inappropriate
>       and shaping children's communication and information options online; to
>       enable access to positive content and communications based on
>individual
>       values; and to enable service and content providers, and others, to
>create
>       family-friendly environments.
>
>       Enforcement of Current Law: Fostering greater cooperation among
>       law enforcement, industry, and the public, to support vigorous
>       enforcement of existing laws against using the Internet to traffic
>in obscene
>       material and child pornography, stalk children, and commit other
>crimes.

Fortunately there's a coalition forming to oppose this. That is,
emphasizing the free speech implications of rating and filtering proposals.
I understand details will be made public soon. As I said:

>>Look for the usual suspects to stand up and wave around censorware
>>programs, blissfully ignoring the fact that the Supreme Court ruled
>>recently that the Net should be as free as print or a public square. Last I
>>checked, print publishers would never endorse any "self-labelling" system
>>to stave off Federal censorship. They'd have the balls to stand up and
>>fight. So should the Net.

-Declan