Internet Censorship




How should high tech companies balance international compliance requirements when they jeopardize fundamental freedoms?	Internet Censorship By Olayinka Arowolo, MBA ATLANTA (February 20, 2006) -- The internet currently is the only market space where strict censorship standards have not been codified or enforced. Recently, the Justice Department’s subpoena request for one million random search page records from Google to “identify internet search patterns of sexual predators on the internet” was rejected by the company citing consumer privacy violations. It’s a controversial issue that cannot be remedied without substantial grey areas. Do we really want to create a virtual society that is as controlled and as restricted as the Chinese? They heavily regulate the internet use of Chinese citizens. How should high tech companies balance international compliance requirements when they jeopardize fundamental freedoms? From a corporate perspective, freedom is relative depending on the form of government in place. Google has had to launch a "censorship friendly" version of its search engine in China that blocks content Chinese officials find "objectionable” Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and Cisco came under criticism last week at a briefing on internet freedom in China. The tech giants are currently cooperating with Chinese censorship requirements. The principal threat of internet censorship today is the Communications Decency Act, a law passed by Congress and signed by the President in January, 1996 which would apply quite radical regulations to speech on the internet. What is the Communications Decency Act (CDA)? The CDA criminalizes "indecent" speech on the internet. One section of the CDA defines indecency as speech depicting or describing sexual or excretory acts or organs in a patently offensive fashion under contemporary community standards. Each of these clauses--indecent, depicting or describing, patently offensive, and contemporary community standards--hides a landmine threatening the future of freedom of speech. There is no justification for treating the printed and electronic word differently. The consequences of doing so will become most apparent in the next century, as printed books and magazines continue to decline in importance compared to the sheer volume of words available online. If the full protection of the First Amendment applies only to books and magazines printed on paper, then the First Amendment will become a historical curiosity. The Supreme Court ruled that the internet is a unique medium entitled to the highest protection under the free speech protections of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. This gives the internet same free speech protection as print. The Court struck down the Communications Decency Act (CDA), Congress' first attempt to censor speech online. Olayinka Arowolo is president of Atlanta-based Aroviz Online and Associates, LLC. Aroviz is a provider of video mail and audition automation software platforms. What do you think? Feedback here. back to the top	More Headlines... On the Ethanol Bandwagon, Big Names and Big Risks Brazil Leading World in Effort to Boost Use of Ethanol A Closer Look at Forbes' Billionaries in Technology Lawyer for Scrushy sees Skilling, Lay as 'doomed' 5 Audit Red Flags Internet Censorship A New Threat To Your Credit Rating H&R Block Gets Its Own Taxes Wrong Will Wireless Technology Bridge the Digital Divide? Miami Beach gains a new heavy hitter The Man Who Saved Richard Scrushy Cut Down the Phone Tree Print this issue here!