EFFector       Vol. 11, No. 13       Sep. 23, 1998       editor@eff.org
A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation     ISSN 1062-9424

IN THE 141st ISSUE OF EFFECTOR:

See http://www.eff.org for more information on EFF activities & alerts!

 

ALERT: House Commerce Committee Poised to Pass CDA II: Contact Legislators ASAP!

Electronic Frontier Foundation Alert, Sept. 23, 1998 (partially expires Sept. 24, 1998; please do not redistribute after Oct. 1, 1998; check Web site for update.)

(This is another unfortunately short-notice alert; sometimes Congress acts rapidly and with little warning, several times in a row.)

ACTION:

Please IMMEDIATELY call and fax the House Commerce Committee (contact info below), and urge them to to REJECT the Internet censorship bill known as the "Child Online Protection Act" (a.k.a. "CDA II"), H.R. 3783.

Next visit the alert page of the Blue Ribbon Campaign for Online Free Speech:
  http://www.eff.org/br
and follow the instructions to contact your own legislators to oppose this and related legislation (you can send your legislators a free fax via the Web!)

Please JOIN THE CAMPAIGN! We need ALL EFF MEMBERS AND EFFECTOR READERS with Web sites to please actively join the campaign by putting Blue Ribbon icons and links to the Blue Ribbon Page on your own Web pages!

MESSAGES:

When contacting the Committee, if you wish to elaborate on why the Committee should reject this bill, here are some basic talking points:

  1. This legislation contains most of the unconstitutional flaws of the original CDA, and last week's Telecommunications Subcommittee markup made the bill even worse than it already was by introducing a prior restraint on free expression.
  2. Though the sponsors of this bill claim it is intended to address only commercial pornographers intentionally targeting minors, the actual language of the bill is vague and overbroad, and would likely sweep in much more than explicit for-profit visual materials. The bill will censor a wide variety of legitimate, protected expression, for adults as well as children.
  3. Congress's own posting of the Starr report would likely violate H.R. 3783.
  4. It is the responsibility (and right) of parents, not the federal government, to decide what is or is not appropriate for minors to have access to, and to supervise minors. In the classroom, this is a local, not federal, issue.
  5. What is appropriate for a 5-year-old is not the same thing as what is appropriate for a 16-year-old, and this bill fails to take account of this basic fact.
  6. Intentionally providing a minor with "harmful matter", online or offline, is already illegal under general obscenity and harmful-to-minor statutes. Congress cannot expand this to a ban on all online publication (which the bill amounts to; the Supreme Court has already found that the kind of age verification this bill, like the CDA, calls for is impractical.
  7. The bill is unnecessary - as parents learn how to supervise their children's online activities (directly, or indirectly with the use of filtering software), the risk of children's exposure to inappropriate online materials is declining.

Feel free to use your own wording of course. The last point can be skipped when contacting the Committee by voice phone, since it is long and rather technical. Other points can be shortened for voice calls, e.g., "The bill will censor a lot more than the commercial pornographers it aims at," for point 2.

COMMITTEE CONTACT INFO:

The House Commerce Committee

There is insufficient time to contact individual legislators' offices. The markup is likely to be completed by early afternoon at the latest.

More information on contacting Congress is available at:
  http://www.eff.org/congress/

SUMMARY:

The Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer Protection of the House Commerce Committee passed a revised (and worsened) version of legislation intended to establish restrictions on online publication of content deemed "harmful to minors" on the Net, on Thu., Sep. 17, 1998. The full House Commerce Committee is now taking up the legislation and is ready to pass it Thu., Sep. 23, 1998.

The untitled bill, which many refer to as "CDA II", would block many adults from receiving or posting a wide variety of legitimate material online that falls under vague harm criteria and includes many of the same constitutional defects as the original Communications Decency Act (CDA). The new version even introduces a prior restraint on publication, which the Supreme Court has already ruled unconstitutional. The bill is a completely useless measure intended to curry favor with theocratic organizations and voters, and does not actually do anything to protect children.

In the name of ostensibly protecting young users of the Internet, CDA II is intended to enact a wide-ranging ban on Web posting of material deemed "harmful to minors." The bill number is H.R. 3783, and it is a companion bill to the Senate's S. 1482, passed as an amendment to an appropriations bill that cleared the Senate over the summer. H.R. 3783 was introduced by Rep. Michael Oxley (R-OH-5).

Back to table of contents

 

EFF calls for recognition of rights in Domain Naming System administration

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 23, 1998

True Internet Democracy Undermined
by Latest Agreement Over Domain Naming System

Electronic Frontier Foundation Sends Open Letter and Revised Bylaws to IANA & NSI Emphasizing Need to Protect Free Expression on the Net

SAN FRANCISCO, CA -- Charging that a proposed plan to revamp the Internet Domain Naming System (DNS) would threaten both the democratic governance of the Internet and basic human rights principles of free expression and due process, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today called for substantial changes in the scheme.

EFF's call came in an open letter to the Internet community and a set of proposed bylaw changes sent to the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) and Network Solutions, Inc. (NSI). Together, IANA and NSI have drafted a "New IANA" plan to revamp the DNS processes, in response to a Clinton Administration White Paper calling for changes that reflect the global nature of the Net and which address inefficiencies, over-centralization and several other current problems. The "New IANA" plan is considered the main contender in satisfying these requirements. EFF argues that the plan fundamentally fails to meet these requirements.

EFF Board member John Gilmore said, "we believe that the latest IANA/NSI proposal does not follow the requirements set forth by the White Paper for protecting openness and free expression."

"There are several organizations quietly registering complaints about the proposal with the architects of the New IANA," he continued. "We've tried working from within the process to get our specific concerns related to free speech into the Bylaws and nothing has happened. EFF sees this as such a serious impediment to the future of the Internet that we feel compelled to make this public announcement."

What's at stake is the executive responsibility for the technical aspects of the Internet, as the New IANA will oversee the management of the Internet's infrastructure, including domain name registration and setting technological standards and protocols. The latest agreement between IANA and NSI, which is articulated in a fourth draft of the Bylaws for the New IANA, is close to being finalized since the NSI contract over the DNS is about to expire at the end of this month.

"The U.S. and other governments, Internet users, and standards organizations asked for an international, legally binding, democractic body governed by the full spectrum of Internet users," said Gilmore. "What it's getting instead is another U.S.-centric, closed corporation that would be run by an elite group shielded from public scrutiny."

Specifically, EFF believes that the proposed New IANA Bylaws do not protect the public in the following four areas:

EFF has crafted a set of enhanced and revised Bylaws that address these four areas, which are vital to protect the public interest.

"As a basic principle, any foundation for governance of a communications system, such as the Internet, should stand on the fundamental human right of free expression," said EFF President Barry Steinhardt. "The strongest guarantees of free speech and publication, due process, and nondiscriminatory administration should be written into the charter of any organization empowered with Internet oversight."

"True Internet-wide democracy has to happen now," added Gilmore. "If we were to enact the Bylaws agreed to by IANA and NSI today we would be turning our backs on the possibility of an open governance of the Internet."

EFF has been tracking the DNS governance issue for the past several years. One of EFF's Board members is on the IANA Transition Advisory Group; another has agreed to join the Interim Board; a third was instrumental in the CORE effort to provide a capable competitor in global domain registration. In addition, EFF's legal staff has tracked and commented on numerous proposed policies and drafts, while our activists have closely followed the controversies online and in the press.

EFF's Letter and Revised Bylaws sent to IANA and NSI are on the Web at: http://www.eff.org/pub/GII_NII/DNS_control/

Version 4 of the Proposed Bylaws for the New IANA, agreed to by IANA/NSI, are on the Web at: http://www.iana.org/bylaws-coop.html

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is one of the leading civil liberties organizations devoted to ensuring that the Internet remains the world's first truly global vehicle for free speech, and that the privacy and security of all on-line communication is preserved. Founded in 1990 as a nonprofit, public interest organization, EFF is based in San Francisco, California. EFF maintains an extensive archive at http://www.eff.org of information on electronic privacy, online free speech, and encryption policy.

Back to table of contents

Administrivia

EFFector is published by:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation
1550 Bryant St., Suite 725
San Francisco CA 94103-4832 USA
+1 415 436 9333 (voice)
+1 415 436 9993 (fax)

Editor: Stanton McCandlish, Program Director/Webmaster (mech@eff.org)

Membership & donations: membership@eff.org
Legal services: ssteele@eff.org
General EFF, legal, policy or online resources queries: ask@eff.org

Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged. Signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of EFF. To reproduce signed articles individually, please contact the authors for their express permission. Press releases and EFF announcements may be reproduced individually at will.

To subscribe to EFFector via email, send message body of:
subscribe effector-online
to listserv@eff.org, which will add you to a subscription list for EFFector. To unsubscribe, send a similar message body, like so:
unsubscribe effector-online

Please tell ask@eff.org to manually remove you from the list if this does not work for some reason.

Back issues are available at:
http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Newsletters/EFFector

To get the latest issue, send any message to effector-reflector@eff.org (or er@eff.org), and it will be mailed to you automagically. You can also get:
http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Newsletters/EFFector/current.html

Back to table of contents

Return to EFFector Newsletter Menu


[*]   EFF Welcome Page

Please send any questions or comments to webmaster@eff.org