home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
DP Tool Club 31
/
CDASC_31_1996_juillet_aout.iso
/
vrac
/
info5_96.zip
/
ACLU
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1996-05-20
|
15KB
|
192 lines
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│From: ACLU.Newsfeed-Owner@villa.fc.net │
│ │
│---------------------------------------------------------------- │
│04-12-96 │
│ACLU Newsfeed -- ACLU News Releases Direct to YOU │
│---------------------------------------------------------------- │
│TODAY'S NEWS: │
│ │
│* ACLU v. RENO: TRIAL UPDATE: Government Opens Case in Internet Trial │
│ │
│* New Utah Bill Seeks to Kill Gay Clubs │
│---------------------------------------------------------------- │
│ *ACLU v. RENO: TRIAL UPDATE: Government Opens Case in Internet Trial* │
│ │
│ │
│* 1st Government Witness Acknowledges Difficulty in Finding Sexually │
│Explicit Material Online │
│ │
│* 2nd Government Witness Returns Monday to Conclude Testimony │
│ │
│* Plaintiffs have option to rebut government case Monday │
│ │
│PHILADELPHIA -- Testifying for the government today, Special Agent Howard A. │
│Schmidt acknowledged, in answer to skeptical questioning by a three-judge │
│panel, that it is "highly unlikely" for anyone to come across sexually │
│explicit sites on the Internet by accident. │
│ │
│As the first witness for the government, Agent Schmidt began the morning with│
│a live Internet tour and demonstration of a search for so-called indecency. │
│ The demonstration stopped short of actually displaying any of the images, │
│but traced for the court the route by which Schmidt arrived at various web │
│sites. │
│ │
│Schmidt acknowledged -- under cross-examination -- that majority of the sites│
│he found would have been off limits had he been running a software program │
│such as SurfWatch, that blocks access to Internet sites considered │
│inappropriate for children. │
│ │
│Marjorie Heins, who conducted cross-examination for the ACLU, noted that │
│Agent Schmidt's expertise -- and the government's case -- lies in focusing on│
│a very narrow category of sexual material, much of which is already covered │
│by existing obscenity law. │
│ │
│"In today's testimony, the government attempted to divert the court's │
│attention from the serious concerns of our plaintiffs by focusing on material│
│that is highly inflammatory and largely irrelevant to this case," Heins said.│
│ │
│The consolidated cases of ACLU v. Reno and ALA v. DOJ challenge provisions of│
│the Communications Decency Act that criminalize making available to minors │
│"indecent" or "patently offensive" speech. │
│ │
│Under questioning by the judges, Agent Schmidt was asked how he would enforce│
│the censorship law when confronted with a safe-sex information web-site that │
│displayed an image illustrating how to put a condom on an erect penis. │
│ │
│Agent Schmidt said that since the context was "educational, not purely for │
│pleasure purposes," he would not censor the site but advise the publishers to│
│post warnings. │
│ │
│His answer was different when asked how he would rate an online copy of the │
│controversial Vanity Fair magazine cover featuring the actress Demi Moore, │
│nearly naked and eight months pregnant. │
│ │
│In that case, Schmidt said, the Communications Decency Act would apply │
│because the image was "for fun." He also said, in answer to a query from │
│Judge Stuart Dalzell, that the community standard as to the offensive of the │
│image might be different for Minnesota than it would for New York. │
│ │
│"It is ironic that, according to the government, an explicit online image of │
│an erect penis in an educational context would be acceptable, whereas Vanity │
│Fair, a constitutionally protected publication containing a much less │
│explicit image, would be censored," Heins said. │
│ │
│Following Agent Schmidt's testimony, the final plaintiff witness, Dr. Albert │
│Vezza, told the judges about PICS (Platform for Internet Content Selection), │
│a new rating system designed to allow parents to control children's access to│
│the Internet without censorship. │
│ │
│Dr. Vezza is associate director of the MIT Laboratory for Computer Sciences │
│and has chief responsibility for the PICS project. He was unable to testify │
│earlier in the case due to scheduling conflicts. │
│ │
│Dr. Vezza said he expected that wide industry acceptance of the PICS standard│
│would enable any number of "third-party" organizations such as the PTA, the │
│Christian Coalition or the Boy Scouts of America to rate content for Internet│
│users. │
│ │
│The second and final government witness, Dr. Dan Olsen, a professor of │
│computer science at Brigham Young University, took the stand in the │
│mid-afternoon. │
│ │
│Dr. Olsen acknowledged that the PICS standard would allow parents to control │
│their children's Internet viewing according to their own values or via a │
│rating system devised by a trusted organization. │
│ │
│He also acknowledged that a system he had conceived in which Internet sites │
│must be labelled by the content originator, would not allow for such an │
│independent rating scheme. │
│ │
│While plaintiff lawyers completed cross-examination of Dr. Olsen today, he │
│will return on Monday for redirect by government lawyers and to answer any │
│questions the judges may have. │
│ │
│It is now anticipated that Monday, April 15, will be the last day of trial in│
│ACLU v Reno. Plaintiff lawyers will have the opportunity on Monday (instead │
│of April 26) to call witnesses to rebut the governments's testimony. │
│ However, the ACLU and ALA coalitions did not indicate which witnesses, if │
│any they would call. │
│ │
│Because the April 26 rebuttal day is no longer necessary, the next date in │
│court is set for June 3, when the three-judge panel will hear oral arguments │
│from both plaintiffs and defendants. │
│ │
│The judges are expected to issue a ruling some time in the weeks following. │
│ Under expedited provisions, any appeal on rulings regarding the new │
│censorship law will be made directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. │
│ │
│Lawyers for the ACLU appearing before the judges are Christopher Hansen, │
│Marjorie Heins, Ann Beeson, and Stefan Presser, legal director of the ACLU of│
│Pennsylvania. │
│---------------------------------------------------------------- │
│ *New Utah Bill Seeks to Kill Gay Clubs* │
│ │
│Utah lawmakers have reached a compromise on legislation aimed at restricting │
│gay student clubs at Utah high schools while allowing the Salt Lake City │
│School District to lift its blanket ban on all extracurricular clubs, the │
│Salt Lake City Tribune reported. │
│ │
│Passage of the new proposal is on the agenda of next Wednesday's special │
│session of the Legislature. The old proposal, which would have forbidden │
│teachers from condoning or promoting "illegal activity," has been replaced by│
│language that targets "criminal behavior" -- a change supporters hope will │
│alleviate concerns that the measure might trample free speech rights and │
│ interfere with acts of civil disobedience in teachers' private lives. │
│ │
│And after lengthy talks with lawyers and school officials, the governor and │
│key lawmakers have agreed to add new provisions that would allow school │
│districts to ban student clubs that promote "bigotry, encourage criminal │
│behavior or involve human sexuality." │
│ │
│Leavitt said that would extend to heterosexual as well as lesbian and gay │
│clubs. Doug Bates, attorney for the state Office of Education, said if the│
│new law is enacted, he was all but certain the Salt Lake School District │
│would move to lift its February ban on all student clubs and replace it with │
│a ban on gay clubs. │
│ │
│But that move would tantamount to discrimination, said a student closely │
│involved with the East High School Gay-Straight Alliance, which sparked much │
│of the current controversy when Salt Lake City school board officials voted │
│in February to ban all student clubs rather than allow their group to form. │
│ │
│"It's an unfair denial of student's rights to life, liberty and happiness," │
│said Kelli Peterson, the club's founder. "We do not talk about having sex. │
│ We do not promote bigotry. We promote acceptance." │
│ │
│At issue is the applicability of the federal Equal Access Act of 1984, backed│
│at the time by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and originally drafted to give │
│Bible-study groups access to school facilities for extracurricular │
│activities. │
│ │
│The Utah Attorney General's Office and the state Office of Education │
│officially have opined that under the law, school districts have no basis for│
│forbidding specific clubs, unless they engage in illegal activities. │
│ │
│Carol Gnade, director of the Utah chapter of the American Civil Liberties │
│Union, said that the latest version of bill "flies in the face of the │
│equal-access law" and is certain to be challenged in court. "This is no │
│better than the original version and probably worse," Gnade told the Tribune.│
│ │
│---------------------------------------------------------------- │
│ONLINE RESOURCES FROM THE ACLU NATIONAL OFFICE │
│---------------------------------------------------------------- │
│ACLU Freedom Network Web Page: http://www.aclu.org. │
│America Online users should check out our live chats, auditorium events, │
│*very* active message boards, and complete news on civil liberties, at │
│keyword ACLU. │
│ │
│---------------------------------------------------------------- │
│ACLU Newsfeed │
│American Civil Liberties Union National Office │
│132 West 43rd Street │
│New York, New York 10036 │
│ │
│To subscribe to the ACLU Newsfeed, send a message to majordomo@aclu.org with │
│"subscribe News" in the body of the message. To terminate your subscription,│
│send a message to majordomo@aclu.org with "unsubscribe News" in the body of │
│the message. │
│ │
│For general information about the ACLU, write to info@aclu.org. │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘