|
 |
|
|||||
 |
| FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE |
CONTACT:
Alan Davidson CDT Staff Counsel Email: abd@cdt.org Phone: 202-637-9800 or Ari Schwartz CDT Policy Analyst Email: ari@cdt.org |
WASHINGTON, January 11, 1999 — A broad coalition of industry and civil liberties groups told
a federal judge in Philadelphia today that the new Child Online Protection
Act (COPA) violates the constitutional right of Americans to free speech
and fails to protect children.
More than 20 groups representing publishers, Internet service providers,
journalists and the technology industry signed an amicus brief in support
of the American Civil Liberties Union's challenge to the COPA. Many of the
groups were among the plaintiffs that successfully challenged the
government's previous attempt to limit speech on the Internet, the
Communications Decency Act. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the law was
unconstitutional in June 1997.
Among those signing today's amicus brief were: The Association of American
Publishers, Inc., American Society of Newspaper Editors, BiblioBytes, Inc.,
The Center for Democracy and Technology, The Comicbooks Legal Defense Fund,
The Commercial Internet eXchange Association, The Computer and
Communications Industry Association, The Freedom to Read Foundation, The
Interactive Digital Software Association, The Internet Alliance, Magazine
Publishers of America, The National Association of College Stores, The
National Association of Recording Merchandisers, The Newspaper Association
of America, People for the American Way, The Periodical and Book
Association of America, Inc., PSINet Inc., The Publishers Marketing
Association, The Recording Industry Association of America and The Society
of Professional Journalists.
"Those signing this brief represent a very broad group with diverse
interests who agree on at least one thing - this new law is just as
unconstitutional as the government's last attempt at Internet censorship,"
said Jerry Berman, executive director of CDT, one of the country's leading
Internet policy think-tanks.
"We also know that there are many more effective ways of protecting
children from inappropriate content on the Internet than this ill-conceived
law that limits the rights of adults to free speech," he said.
As part of a preliminary injunction proceeding, the coalition's 35-page
amicus brief argues that less restrictive alternatives - such as filtering
software and other technologies - do a far better job of protecting
children in a global medium than any U.S. law ever could.
"These technologies are effective and improving every day," Berman noted.
"They are easily available, simple to use and inexpensive or free. These
technologies work. Law doesn't. But the law does lull parents into
thinking their children are safe while diverting law enforcement resources
away from genuine threats to kids."
Federal District Court Judge Lowell A. Reed Jr. last November temporarily
blocked prosecutors from enforcing the COPA. Reed ruled that the law
likely violates the First Amendment. A preliminary injunction hearing in
the case is scheduled to begin 20 January, with a ruling from the Judge
Reed expected by February 1.
For more background information on the Child Online Protection Act (COPA)
and the Supreme Court challenge to the Communications Decency Act, please
refer to http://www.cdt.org/speech.
|
The Center For Democracy & Technology 1634 Eye Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006 (v) 202.637.9800 (f) 202.637.0968 Contact CDT Copyright © 2005 by Center for Democracy and Technology. |