We Get Email

--- Following message extracted from FIDONEWS @ 1:18/14 ---
By Christopher Baker on Fri Jan 24 14:24:21 1997

From: Mike Bilow
To: Christopher Baker
Date: 23 Jan 97 04:52:22
Subj: ACLU Cyber-Liberties Update

* Forwarded (from: Netmail) by Mike Bilow using BilowMail0.2.
* Originally from ACLU Cyber-Liberties Update Owner to Mike Bilow.
* Original dated: Jan 22 '97, 20:45

From: "ACLU Cyber-Liberties Update Owner"@newmedium.com
To: cyber-liberties@aclu.org

ACLU Cyber-Liberties Update
Wednesday, January 22, 1997

CONTENTS:

• Reno v. ACLU Update: Government's Brief Asserts Unprecedented Powers to criminalize Online Speech
• ACLU Files Suit against New York State Internet Censorship Law
• Georgia Internet Case Update
• Northwestern University Defends Free Speech on the Internet
• ACLU Speaks on Cyber-Liberties
• About the Cyber-Liberties Update

* Reno v. ACLU Update: Government's Brief Asserts Unprecedented Powers to criminalize Online Speech

After reviewing the Justice Department's brief on the Communications Decency Act filed late yesterday with the U.S. Supreme Court, the ACLU said that the government is seeking unprecedented powers to criminalize speech on the Internet.

The ACLU said that the government's 55-page brief in Reno v. ACLU is "at odds with the extensive factual findings of the trial court," which ruled last June that censorship provisions of the CDA unconstitutionally restricted free speech.

"The government's arguments, if adopted, would justify blanket censorship not just on the Internet, but in traditional forums such as libraries and bookstores," said Christopher Hansen, an ACLU national staff attorney on the Reno v. ACLU legal team.

Further, he noted that the government's brief makes the astounding claim that it is protecting the First Amendment by censoring free speech on the Internet, asserting that a fear of encountering "indecency" online could deter potential users from exercising their First Amendment interest in accessing the new medium.

"It is supremely ironic that the government now says it is protecting the First Amendment rights of Americans by threatening people with jail for engaging in constitutionally protected speech," Hansen said.

The kind of "indecency" identified by government witnesses in the lower court included words and images displayed online by organizations such as the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, Stop Prisoner Rape, Human Rights Watch and Critical Path AIDS Project, all plaintiffs in Reno v. ACLU, Hansen said.

The Supreme Court announced today that it would hear oral argument in the case on Wednesday, March 19, at 10:00 a.m. Each side will be given a half-hour to present their arguments. According to the briefing schedule set by the Court, plaintiff's answering briefs are due on February 20. The government's final, or reply brief, is due on March 7.

In addition to the government's brief, three sets of plaintiff groups filed friend-of-the-court briefs on Tuesday in support of the government's position: Enough is Enough (along with eight other plaintiffs), Morality in Media, and a group of members of Congress led by former Senator J. James Exon (D-Neb.), who sponsored the Communications Decency Act.

Complete information on the ACLU's challenge to the CDA, including a chronology, trial briefs, affidavits, courtroom transcripts, and a backgrounder on Supreme Court procedures in the case, are available online at the ACLU's website (http://www.aclu.org) and America Online site (keyword: ACLU).

* ACLU Files Suit against New York State Internet Censorship Law

The American Civil Liberties Union, the New York Civil Liberties Union, the American Library Association and others last week filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction against a New York statute criminalizing free speech in cyberspace.

At an interactive news conference, the groups said they were filing suit because the law, aimed at shielding minors from "indecency," is an unconstitutional content-based restriction on free speech that would reduce adult communications to levels acceptable for a six-year-old.

The ACLU said that the New York law is similar to the federal Communications Decency Act, which the ACLU, the ALA and others successfully challenged in federal district court in Philadelphia after it became law last February. In addition, a separate three-judge panel in New York found the CDA unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds. The Philadelphia case, Reno v. ACLU, is currently under review by the Supreme Court, and the New York case is pending in the Supreme Court.

Section 235.21(3) of the New York Penal Law, which became effective on November 1, 1996, makes it a crime to disseminate "indecent" materials that are "harmful to minors" through any computer communications network.

"Like the federal CDA, the New York law is technically and economically infeasible to enforce, it blocks speech that has value to a great many people, and it ignores effective alternatives available both to protect children and to protect free speech," said Ann Beeson, an ACLU national staff attorney and member of the Reno v. ACLU litigation team. The ACLU is also lead counsel in ALA v. Pataki.

"Anyone who thinks children will be protected by this law is sadly mistaken," Beeson said. "Experts estimate that at least 40 per cent of information on the Internet originates from non-U.S. sites, which minors will still be able to access. The only group this law really protects is politicians, who can claim they are passing 'tough' legislation. Everyone else is out in the cold."

Today's lawsuit is the second such challenge to a state cybercensorship law, according to the ACLU. The first was filed by the ACLU and others in September against a statute in Georgia, now scheduled to go to trial in late January. The ACLU said it has been monitoring state regulation of the Internet and that currently, over 20 states have considered such laws.

Plaintiffs in the case are the American Library Association, the Freedom to Read Foundation, the New York Library Association, the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, Westchester Library System, BiblioBytes, Association of American Publishers, Interactive Digital Software Association, Magazine Publishers of America, Public Access Networks Corp. (PANIX), ECHO, NYC Net, Art on the Net, Peacefire and the American Civil Liberties Union.

Additional materials on the New York lawsuit, including the complaint, plaintiff statements, and a RealAudio recording of the news conference can be found at http://www.aclu.org/news/nycdahome/html [faulty URL [jb 4/25/01]] update: http://www.aclu.org/news/nycdahome.html

* Georgia Internet Case Update

An evidentiary hearing is scheduled for January 30 in ACLU v. Miller, the ACLU challenge to a Georgia Internet law. The Georgia law makes it a crime to use a name that "falsely identifies" a speaker on the Internet, without distinguishing whether the person communicating had any intent to deceive or defraud or simply wanted to keep his or her identity unknown.

The complaint also states that the law may prohibit web links by making it a crime to publish information "using" trade names, logos or other symbols, again without regard to the nature of the use, and without any definition of what constitutes "use" on a computer network.

At the January 30 hearing an expert witness for the ACLU is scheduled to demonstrate the Internet to the court.

* Northwestern University Defends Free Speech on the Internet

The ACLU congratulates Northwestern University for its stance in support of free speech. Recently, controversy arose around the web page of Associate Professor Arthur R. Butz, who had posted Holocaust revisionist opinions to his page on the university's servers. Despite numerous complaints, the University declined to ask the professor to remove the web page, and when pushed on the topic referred to campus policy on intellectual freedom as it relates to computer usage:

Intellectual Freedom: The network is a free and open forum for the expression of ideas, including viewpoints that are strange, unorthodox, or unpopular. The network administrators place no official sanctions upon the expression of personal opinion on the network. However, such opinions may not be represented as views of Northwestern University.

As the University stated, Professor Butz made it clear that he was presenting his own views and in no way representing the views of the University, and any censorship was therefore inappropriate. The ACLU supports such free speech codes for university computers.

* ACLU Speaks on Cyber-Liberties

Barry Steinhardt, Hartford Chapter ACLU, February 12, 7 p.m., Rittenberg Lounge, Trinity College, Hartford, Ct. The Connecticut CLU can be reached at 860-247-9823.

ACLU Cyber-Liberties Update Editor:
Lisa Kamm (kamml@aclu.org)
American Civil Liberties Union National Office
132 West 43rd Street
New York, New York 10036

To subscribe to the ACLU Cyber-Liberties Update, send a message to majordomo@aclu.org with "subscribe Cyber-Liberties" in the body of your message. To terminate your subscription, send a message to majordomo@aclu.org with "unsubscribe Cyber-Liberties" in the body.

The Cyber-Liberties Update is archived at http://www.aclu.org/issues/cyber/updates.html

For general information about the ACLU, write to info@aclu.org.

Lisa Kamm
http://www.aclu.org
kamml@aclu.org

This Message was sent to cyber-liberties

Origin: N1BEE BBS +1 401 944 8498 (1:323/107)

-30-