Utah Internet Speech Law Challenged

internet law free speech utah

Does Utah Internet law threaten free speech?

What does the Utah Internet Law do?

Utah has recently enacted a law in an effort to curb the ability of minors to access adult materials on the internet.

Specifically, the Utah Internet Law would set up a ranking system whereby parents and others concerned about the content displayed on websites could turn on and off access to those sites indicated as containing more adult content. Though the new cyber law would have no effect on websites based outside the state of Utah, the Utah Internet Law has still faced criticism from a variety of groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

Why would legislators choose to enact the Utah Internet Law

As a historically conservative state with vast influence exerted by the Mormon Church headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah has seen an array of efforts throughout the years by legislators attempting to preserve ‘family’ and ‘traditional’ values. Politicians in this instance feel that the internet allows unknowing children to access pornographic and violent information in a way in which should not be allowed.

Moreover, politicians in Utah have expressed their belief, through the passage of the Utah Internet Law, that private filtering and parental control options are not effective when it comes to regulating what children are able to view on the internet. These politicians believe that a law specifying and allowing parents to see the rankings of websites prior to children being able to access these sites will effectively curb child access to adult content on the internet.

Why is the ACLU trying to get the Utah Internet Law overturned?

The ACLU views the Utah Internet Law as the Utah state government overextending its regulation authority into the realm of constitutionally protected free speech. Even though the Utah Internet Law would not be able to regulate even the most horrific pornographic images produced from sources outside the state, the ACLU argues that local Utah citizens have every right to express themselves and view what they choose to view without interference from the government.

The ACLU argues further that if parents want to personally limit their children’s access to pornographic or other material, the parents have the right to purchase private parental control programs or enact, in other ways, restrictions on the websites able to be viewed in their household. The ACLU has mentioned the inability of the Utah Internet Law to even effectively explain what constitutes offensive materials. Items that the ACLU fears will be banned if the Utah Internet Law is not overturned include access to medical and anatomy websites, and access to nude art from all eras in history.

Filed Under: Internet Lawsuits, Internet Lawyer Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

Tennessee Outlaws Internet Photos That Cause Emotional Distress

internet photos emotional distress

Should Internet photos that cause emotional distress be illegal?

What is the new Tennessee law regarding internet photos and emotional distress all about?

The Tennessee legislature has recently passed a bill which will make it against the law to post some kinds of internet photos.

Offenders face a $2500 fine and up to around a year in jail if they are caught in the act of posting an image on the internet that is likely to ‘frighten, intimidate, or cause emotional distress.’ Most likely, this includes sexual and violent pictures posted on websites or on personal social media sites like Facebook and Myspace.

Why would legislators want to enact a law regulating internet photos and emotional distress?

Tennessee legislators, along with legislators across the globe feel that the freedom individuals have to express themselves with internet photos will cause problems if not restricted and regulated. Other countries have gone so far as to enact full-fledged censorship campaigns to restrain individuals from posting and viewing potentially inflammatory images. For example, the Chinese government filters any internet content regarding the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre, and in an attempt to stop child pornography, the Australian government makes it illegal for some adult women with small breasts to pose nude on the internet.

While the Tennessee law internet photos law is likely not intended for blatant censorship of controversial political topics, the law grants broad authority to the state to determine what is or is not offensive. Basically, if a person is caught having posted an image online that causes a person emotional distress-even if that person was not meant or expected to view the image in the first place-the poster could be punished.

What has the response been to the Tennessee law concerning internet photos and emotional distress?

The Tennessee law has met a critical response from internet users, professors, and free speech enthusiasts alike. Some argue that this the Tennessee internet regulation will simply keep people from acting in a malicious way towards others, but many people assert that the law violates free speech laws and should have no place in a purportedly free society. Others claim that the US Supreme Court should invalidate the Tennessee internet regulation law as a violation of the principles of the Constitution.

Specific controversy concerns the fact that a person who posts an offensive image can be disciplined even if he or she did not intend for the ‘victim’ to view the post. Perhaps the law would have met less controversy if it was a restriction on sending unwanted images to people who did not want to see them, rather than a blanket restriction, punishing even posters with no intent to harm or offend the viewing party.

Critics further claim punishing internet photos or online posts that cause a viewer ‘emotional distress’ is hard to enforce because no objective standards exists to determine exactly what a reasonable person would be offended by seeing.

Filed Under: CyberCrime, Internet Lawsuits, Internet Lawyer Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

Internet Access and Human Rights Law

internet human rights law

Does Internet human rights law exist?

What is Internet Human Rights Law?

Internet Human Rights Law concerns questions about how government regulation and monitoring of people in their internet activities curbs individual liberty and violates basic human rights. However, some would contend that Internet human rights law does not exist because online access is a luxury instead of a human right.

As the internet has become more prevalent and popular, governments across the world have enacted laws which restrict internet usage, or which in some other way regulate those who are able to use and access the internet. This can take the form of blatant censorship of internet sites which a government disapproves of, pressure put on internet service providers (ISPs) to restrict access to some websites, and legal action against individuals who break a myriad of copyright laws while dealing with data on the internet.

Where is Internet Human Rights Law particularly being violated?

Most famously, the government of China censors a variety of topics from being able to be accessed. For example, a search for ‘democracy’ or ‘human rights’ on the internet in China will yield far different and more limited results than searching for those terms in other countries would. China has even been known to jail people who write on internet weblogs (bloggers) if their content expresses dissatisfaction with the Chinese status quo.

Other examples of Internet Human Rights Law can be seen in how some governments (including Egypt) are allowed to shut down the internet in times of serious emergency. Even the industrialized nations of France and the United Kingdom are dabbling with internet censorship as groups in both nations have passed legislation punishing individuals for their internet activities. In the UK and France people who violate copyright laws may be prohibited from accessing the internet in its entirety.

What does Internet Human Rights Law mean for the future of the internet?

Governments around the world claim that Internet Human Rights Law is not violated by the measures implemented to censor and restrict access to the internet. Governments further claim that these efforts are necessary to protect intellectual property and copyrighted/trademarked images from duplication and abuse. Others in government claim that the internet needs to be regulated to ensure the security and safety of all citizens.

Opponents of government regulation claim that Internet Human Rights Law is something that needs to be more vigorously studied and understood. These individuals assert that the government should in the interests of promoting and maintaining freedom of speech avoid any regulation of the internet whatsoever. These Internet human rights law advocates claim that the Web has been a driving force for innovation and for human freedom, most especially seen through the recent internet-fueled Middle East revolutions to hit Egypt, Libya and Tunisia.

Filed Under: Internet Lawsuits, Internet Lawyer Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »

Free! Get Internet legal and marketing updates plus 3 chapters of the #1 Internet legal protection book for business website owners. Over 40 pages packed with strategies you can use to protect yourself without a lawyer.

Free! Get Internet legal and marketing updates plus 3 chapters of the #1 Internet legal protection book for business website owners. Over 40 pages packed with strategies you can use to protect yourself without a lawyer.