Jump to content

House overwhelmingly approves "Offensive Images" bill


jak722

Recommended Posts

House vote on illegal images sweeps in Wi-Fi, Web sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday overwhelmingly approved a bill saying that anyone offering an open Wi-Fi connection to the public must report illegal images including "obscene" cartoons and drawings--or face fines of up to $300,000.

 

 

 

 

 

That broad definition would cover individuals, coffee shops, libraries, hotels, and even some government agencies that provide Wi-Fi. It also sweeps in social-networking sites, domain name registrars, Internet service providers, and e-mail service providers such as Hotmail and Gmail, and it may require that the complete contents of the user's account be retained for subsequent police inspection.

 

 

 

 

 

Before the House vote, which was a lopsided 409 to 2, Rep. Nick Lampson (D-Texas) held a press conference on Capitol Hill with John Walsh, the host of America's Most Wanted and Ernie Allen, head of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

 

 

 

 

 

Allen said the legislation--called the Securing Adolescents From Exploitation-Online Act, or SAFE Act--will "ensure better reporting, investigation, and prosecution of those who use the Internet to distribute images of illegal child pornography."

 

 

 

 

 

The SAFE Act represents the latest in Congress' efforts--some of which have raised free speech and privacy concerns--to crack down on sex offenders and Internet predators. One bill introduced a year ago was even broader and would have forced Web sites and blogs to report illegal images. Another would require sex offenders to supply e-mail addresses and instant messaging user names.

 

 

 

 

 

Wednesday's vote caught Internet companies by surprise: the Democratic leadership rushed the SAFE Act to the floor under a procedure that's supposed to be reserved for noncontroversial legislation. It was introduced October 10, but has never received even one hearing or committee vote. In addition, the legislation approved this week has changed substantially since the earlier version and was not available for public review.

 

 

 

 

 

Not one Democrat opposed the SAFE Act. Two Republicans did: Rep. Ron Paul, the libertarian-leaning presidential candidate from Texas, and Rep. Paul Broun from Georgia.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is what the SAFE Act requires:

 

 

 

 

 

Anyone providing an "electronic communication service" or "remote computing service" to the public who learns about the transmission or storage of information about certain illegal activities or an illegal image must;

 

 

(a) register their name, mailing address, phone number, and fax number with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children's "CyberTipline" and,

 

 

 

(B) "make a report" to the CyberTipline that,

 

 

© must include any information about the person or Internet address behind the suspect activity and,

 

 

(d) the illegal images themselves. (By the way, "electronic communications service" and "remote computing service" providers already have some reporting requirements under existing law too.)

 

The definition of which images qualify as illegal is expansive. It includes obvious child pornography, meaning photographs and videos of children being molested. But it also includes photographs of fully clothed minors in overly "lascivious" poses, and certain obscene visual depictions including a "drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting." (Yes, that covers the subset of anime called hentai).

 

 

 

 

 

Someone providing a Wi-Fi connection probably won't have to worry about the SAFE Act's additional requirement of retaining all the suspect's personal files if the illegal images are "commingled or interspersed" with other data. But that retention requirement does concern Internet service providers, which would be in a position to comply. So would e-mail service providers, including both Web-based ones and companies that offer POP or IMAP services.

 

 

 

 

 

"USISPA has long supported harmonized reporting of child pornography incidents to the (NCMEC). ISPs report over 30,000 incidents a year, and we work closely with NCMEC and law enforcement on the investigation," Kate Dean, head of the U.S. Internet Service Provider Association, said on Wednesday. "We remain concerned, however, that industry would be required to retain images of child pornography after reporting them to NCMEC. It seems like the better approach would be to require the private sector to turn over illicit images and not retain copies."

 

 

 

 

 

Failure to comply with the SAFE Act would result in an initial fine of up to $150,000, and fines of up to $300,000 for subsequent offenses. That's the stick. There's a carrot as well: anyone who does comply is immune from civil lawsuits and criminal prosecutions.

 

 

 

 

 

There are two more points worth noting.

 

 

 

First, the vote on the SAFE Act seems unusually rushed. It's not entirely clear that the House Democratic leadership really meant this legislation to slap new restrictions on hundreds of thousands of Americans and small businesses who offer public wireless connections. But they'll nevertheless have to abide by the new rules if senators go along with this idea (and it's been a popular one in the Senate).

 

 

 

The second point is that Internet providers already are required by another federal law to report child pornography sightings to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which is in turn charged with forwarding that report to the appropriate police agency. So there's hardly an emergency, which makes the Democrats' rush for a vote more inexplicable than usual.

 

 

 

ORIGINAL SOURCE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Okay, for one, NO MORE CAM [bleep]! (Hurray...?)

 

 

 

Secondly... does anyone else think is has to be one of the most stupidest thing ever slapped on the face of the internet?

 

 

 

I mean, im sure it has GOOD intentions... (Hitting on child pornography, etc...)

 

 

 

 

 

But we're talking about the internet here... You don't even know where this picture or that video is coming from most of the time, and yet if you fail to report it, you get a $150,000 fine?!

 

 

 

 

 

What the heck ever happened to net neutrality?!

 

 

 

 

 

Bah... to think we almost had one of these in Canada... :wall:

 

 

 

 

 

Well happy hunting US Government.

 

 

 

I hope you have fun charging half your population... -.-

The Enrichment Center reminds you that the weighted companion cube will never threaten to stab you and, in fact, cannot speak.

 

In the event that the weighted companion cube does speak, the Enrichment Center urges you to disregard its advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't see how on Earth America would police this. Take a social networking site, for instance. If someone posts an obscene image on that, that's surely the social networking site administrator's responsibility, and the responsiblity of the person who posted it in the first place; not whoever happens to be providing the Internet.

 

 

 

Nor can I see how this solves the problem of child pornography. Surely, using inside intelligence to catch the paedophiles out would be a better tactic?

 

 

 

I can't see how this Act helps anything... :|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see anything wrong with it (because it has good intentions). Even if you don't know the source of the offense, you can still report it and avoid being fined (seeing that you have a valid reason). Then it's up to the CIA to track down the sources. 8-)

[oh man... come on.. i didnt do that bad to your modesty... and i was drunk! you were not! you took advantage of me... wildernessfreelancer!]

Yep, that's what they'll always say, LoL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The stupid part about it, is the fact that people who don't live in America can freely do this, causing trouble for site administrators giving them unnessary headaches.

 

 

 

-1 for America.

 

 

 

The good news is, there's not enough people in the world who works for the government that can "fine" the world.

 

 

 

Yup, thats basically what they said they was gonna do.. take on the world.

If you love me, send me a PM.

 

8 - Love me

2 - Hate me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do believe they have watched "Team America - World Police" a little bit too much. :roll: I'm amazed that Sen. Byrd and the rest of the Dems were naive or crazy enough to pass this Internet version of the Patriot Act. I mean, come ON, who ISN'T offended by something they see on the web almost once a week? It's just too bloody subjective in order to be used properly. :wall: :wall:

You never know which rabbit hole you jump into will lead to Wonderland. - Ember3579

Aku Soku Zan. - Shinsengumi

You wanna mess with me or my friends? Pick your poison.

If you have any complaints about me, please refer to this link. Your problems are important to me.

Don't talk smack if you're not willing to say it to the person's face. On the same line, if you're not willing to back up your opinions no matter what, your opinion may as well be nonexistent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hurray for Democrats.

Untitled.png

My heart is broken by the terrible loss I have sustained in my old friends and companions and my poor soldiers. Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won. -Sir Arthur Wellesley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the attempt to more easily catch criminals (who will still get away), everyone else in the world just lost a little more privacy. :(

612d9da508.png

Mercifull.png

Mercifull <3 Suzi

"We don't want players to be able to buy their way to success in RuneScape. If we let players start doing this, it devalues RuneScape for others. We feel your status in real-life shouldn't affect your ability to be successful in RuneScape" Jagex 01/04/01 - 02/03/12

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a place the public can access the US equivalent of statute? I want to read the exact wording of what kind of image is illegal - as far as I'm concerned that is what this hinges on.
Thats for a judge to decide. There is no exact definition. A nude picture is not necceserily illegal and there are plenty of 100% legal nude art books available, even in the united states, that depict people of all ages, equally a fully clothed image could be defined as erotic and pornographic and thus be considered illegal.

612d9da508.png

Mercifull.png

Mercifull <3 Suzi

"We don't want players to be able to buy their way to success in RuneScape. If we let players start doing this, it devalues RuneScape for others. We feel your status in real-life shouldn't affect your ability to be successful in RuneScape" Jagex 01/04/01 - 02/03/12

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem involving racism = government crap theirselves = government overreact.

 

always happens. you can't censor real life but I bet that's their next step. this is obviously a backlash from that dutch cartoon.

logo.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a place the public can access the US equivalent of statute? I want to read the exact wording of what kind of image is illegal - as far as I'm concerned that is what this hinges on.
Thats for a judge to decide. There is no exact definition. A nude picture is not necceserily illegal and there are plenty of 100% legal nude art books available, even in the united states, that depict people of all ages, equally a fully clothed image could be defined as erotic and pornographic and thus be considered illegal.

 

 

 

Well usually in UK statute any words that are key to the meaning of the law are defined separately (sometimes even satisfactorily!) and I'm wondering if the US system does a similar thing. If they don't and it is indeed up to the discretion of the judge then there are some serious and obvious flaws here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the 'original' version of the bill above, but the one above has been drastically changed...

 

 

 

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.03791:

 

 

 

 

 

The passed bill however, isn't available for review by the public... :(

 

 

 

Im not entirely sure why they do this in the US, but I know in Canada, bills and statutes are open for the public to read before and after they are passed.

The Enrichment Center reminds you that the weighted companion cube will never threaten to stab you and, in fact, cannot speak.

 

In the event that the weighted companion cube does speak, the Enrichment Center urges you to disregard its advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:? This is very confusing.... This will only work in America though, right? No way they could do this for the whole world, right?

 

 

 

Obviously it is a good idea to get a lot more harsher on those that post Child porn and other already illegal pictures, but I mean, what is going to be illegal now?

mergedliongr0xe9.gif

Sig by Ikurai

Your Guide to Posting! Behave or I will send my Moose mounted Beaver launchers at you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The incentive is good, and I'm glad that the US government is cracking down on something that frankly, shouldn't be here (as in, the Internet).

 

 

 

However, putting on a huge fine if you don't report something is just pointless. And besides, because of the ambiguity of the act, it's up to the discretion of the viewer whether to report or not, which will result in fines for people who judged wrong.

 

 

 

Anyway, shouldn't the government be doing this kind of thing themselves instead of press ganging (forced recruiting) the public?

~ W ~

 

sigzi.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the 'original' version of the bill above, but the one above has been drastically changed...

 

 

 

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.03791:

 

 

 

 

 

The passed bill however, isn't available for review by the public... :(

 

 

 

Im not entirely sure why they do this in the US, but I know in Canada, bills and statutes are open for the public to read before and after they are passed.

 

 

 

Wait, so you can't actually read your OWN laws? Pretty serious contradiction with the rule of law there, that is one seriously fudged up system #-o .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem involving racism = government crap theirselves = government overreact.

 

always happens. you can't censor real life but I bet that's their next step. this is obviously a backlash from that dutch cartoon.

 

 

 

You have to read more than just the title, this has nothing at all to do with that.

q8tsigindy500fan.jpg

indy500fanan9.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the 'original' version of the bill above, but the one above has been drastically changed...

 

 

 

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.03791:

 

 

 

 

 

The passed bill however, isn't available for review by the public... :(

 

 

 

Im not entirely sure why they do this in the US, but I know in Canada, bills and statutes are open for the public to read before and after they are passed.

 

 

 

Wait, so you can't actually read your OWN laws? Pretty serious contradiction with the rule of law there, that is one seriously fudged up system #-o .

 

 

 

The government is required to post the text of all laws in such a way that it be open to the general public. If you want to read the exact text of the law, try the library of congress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the 'original' version of the bill above, but the one above has been drastically changed...

 

 

 

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.03791:

 

 

 

 

 

The passed bill however, isn't available for review by the public... :(

 

 

 

Im not entirely sure why they do this in the US, but I know in Canada, bills and statutes are open for the public to read before and after they are passed.

 

 

 

Wait, so you can't actually read your OWN laws? Pretty serious contradiction with the rule of law there, that is one seriously fudged up system #-o .

 

 

 

The government is required to post the text of all laws in such a way that it be open to the general public. If you want to read the exact text of the law, try the library of congress.

 

 

 

Yup, most of it are in the library of congress, but in this case, the changes weren't shown in public until after they passed it, and even then, its still unclear on some parts...

 

 

 

 

Anyway, shouldn't the government be doing this kind of thing themselves instead of press ganging (forced recruiting) the public?

 

 

 

My thoughts exactly. :-k

 

 

 

:? This is very confusing.... This will only work in America though, right? No way they could do this for the whole world, right?

 

 

 

Obviously it is a good idea to get a lot more harsher on those that post Child porn and other already illegal pictures, but I mean, what is going to be illegal now?

 

 

 

Yeah its only in the US, but damn... if they ever manage to regulate and patrol the internet, then im sure world peace is not far away...

 

 

 

My prediction would be this is gonna turn out like those filesharing lawsuits.

 

 

 

You know, like students getting sued for thousands of dollars for sharing a couple of songs just to make an example out of everyone... :?

 

 

 

 

 

So can I still go on porn or no?

 

 

 

Well it didn't take long for someone to ask this question... :lol:

 

 

 

Yes if its "legal" I guess... But don't get caught with anything weird in public, or hosting stuff thats deemed 'illegal' now...

 

 

 

Im still watching how this goes.

 

 

 

Im interested in whether or not they will actually succeed in enforcing this. :-X

The Enrichment Center reminds you that the weighted companion cube will never threaten to stab you and, in fact, cannot speak.

 

In the event that the weighted companion cube does speak, the Enrichment Center urges you to disregard its advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.