— Americans for Separating Adult Content —

I’ve been trying to understand all the attempts for years and I have to admit, it is difficult for the layman. I recently received a letter from the the ACLJ that gave me some hope. But honestly, it also confused me a bit.

I believe that we have a responsibility as adults to keep pornographic material out of the hands of children. I also believe in free speech. COPA, which was actually signed in 1998, was a great answer. But the ACLU stepped in within days and tied up this very good law for years. I think it became declared unconstitutional. I don’t get it.

Then in 2003, the PROTECT Act was signed. This dealt with many online theats, but was primarily aimed at child predators, a more severe problem. Even this now has been declared unconstitutional. Who is in charge of our courts? I believe in free speech but there must be limits on what we allow in its name. There simply must be. Common sense dictates it.

Anyway all the legal mumbo jumbo has actually got me a bit confused right now. The letter from the ACLJ stated that the Supreme Court is supposed to take a look at PROTECT. That’s good news and I hope that real common sense will prevail. I encourage you to support the ACLJ (not the ACLU).

In the process of trying to understand all of this a bit better, I have uncovered a series of articles and publications about COPA, CIPA, and their histories. Maybe one of you readers can understand it all and help me understand exactly where this all stands as of today. If someone can help me, I’ll be happy to post it here.

P.S. I receive more pornographic spam on this blog than I do really objective commentary or analysis. If you are reading this, please consider commenting or writing to me about your views. Thanks

Dear Judge Reed,

I read today that you struck down the 1998 Obscenity Law that would have helped parents and protected America’s children [1]

PHILADELPHIA — A federal judge on Thursday dealt another blow to government efforts to control Internet pornography, striking down a 1998 U.S. law that makes it a crime for commercial Web site operators to let children access “harmful” material.

I know that you are not accountable to me and I am sure that you meant your best at the recent ruling regarding access to adult material by children on the Internet. I’d like to comment however.

If we as a society do nothing while children are allowed to view pornography online, then we are no better than child pornographers or pedophiles. Isn’t that what they do?

In the real (physical) world, we would never allow our children to be exposed so easily to adult material. Children and families deserve to be able to access the entire Internet without concern that large volumes of free samples of adult material are readily available to entice those kids online. Government, business, and technology leaders should be looking for ways to make the Internet more child and family friendly, not less. Parents deserve easier-to-understand solutions than what exist today.

I’ve studied the problem of online access to adult material by children for many years and the law you struck down was the best solution that exists in America. Like it or not, we can’t stop adult material on the Internet, but we can and should do all that can be done to mandate that adult content providers verify the ages of their users before providing adult material to children. I would have thought you knew better.

Your ruling was a victory not for free speech, but for child pornographers, pedophiles, and those who would exploit America’s children for profit.

Sincerely,

Joe Martinico

1. U.S. Judge Blocks 1998 Online Porn Law

There were two interesting announcements today. First the Attorney General of Connecticut announced a bill requiring social networking sites to check ages (1). Second, led by Morality in Media, Inc’s (MIM) President, Robert Peters, thirty-three pro-decency organizations and individuals have sent a letter to the Department of Commerce opposing a revised proposal to create a Triple-X domain name for pornographic web sites on the Internet.(2)

I am personally against the adoption of a .XXX domain name and the use of social networking sites by minors worries me, however much is misunderstood about how to solve these problems. In this blog entry I will once again make the case that…

The best way to stop children from accessing pornography online is to make laws requiring adult websites to get credit card information before allowing access to adult materials AND to outlaw “free samples” of adult content online.

Free Adult Content

There are thousands of adult web sites that allow free access to adult content with nothing more than the click of a mouse. This free material is designed to lure prospective users to pay for an account but it also makes it very easy for children to access that free adult material. Free samples of adult content online should be stopped.

Credit card companies don’t give out credit cards to children under 15 unless their parents specifically arrange for it, so barring illegal activity, requiring a credit card before allowing access to adult content would be the most effective way to reduce access to that adult content by minors.

Again, don’t get me wrong. I am opposed to the adoption of a .XXX Internet domain name. It appalls me when I see statements by IFFOR and ICM that they are trying to “safeguard children”, but both approaches in today’s news miss the mark. Let me explain…

This is a Worldwide Issue and More Than the DOC Are Involved

First, regarding MIM’s letter to the Department of Commerce, The DOC will eventually NOT be in charge of the Internet. Calls are being made around the world for the US to relinquish its control of the root servers and the US is already resigned to eventually doing that. .XXX was a rallying point for governments and standards bodies around the world to prove that the US had too much of a stronghold on the Internet and those calls for a new, unbiased, global body to make decisions on how the Internet grows are being heeded slowly but surely. (3)

At this point in time, decisions about the future of the Internet are being made by an obscure but powerful and quasi private organization called ICANN. ICANN holds at least 3 to 5 meetings annually around the world and their charter is to bring the Internet to governments and people around the world. Their meetings are free to attend (besides travel and accommodations) and they are open to anyone. There are representatives and working groups for governments, business, domain registries and registrars, free speech, Academia, and of course plenty of attorneys and lobbyists. What is conspicuously absent is a lobby or working group that protects the interests of families and children. They just aren’t there and their interests are being ignored.

I say that all of these signatories need to plan for and form a lobby to ICANN whose primary mission is to carry forward the causes of families and children online. The Internet is too important to ignore if we are to protect our families and children. This is a cultural war and will be lost unless we make our needs known and it is being played in a worldwide arena. The DOC is only one front. The bigger front is now being ignored.

We Need to Focus on the Real Problems, Not Broad Hopeless Agendas

Now on to the Attorney General in Connecticut; although I share his concerns, I know three things. 1.) Implementing this type of law will be almost impossible. 2.) Even if they figure out a way to implement it, the law will never be enforced except in cases where it is too late. 3.) I personally think laws like this will cripple nascent online businesses.

The bottom line is it tries to go too far. For social networking sites, the best approach is comprehensive public awareness campaigns. And surely if adult content is being shown on sites that are meant for very young people that should be illegal. The problem is that the companies that build social networking sites generally are not the ones that place the content online. And so content that appears on social networking sites are more a reflection of society than a reflection of the company that built the social networking infrastructure. I just don’t see how we can monitor the ages of kids under 16 online effectively, but we know that kids under 16 don’t get credit cards that easily.

Finally I want to acknowledge that I know there are no full proof solutions and that even with great laws in place the Internet is global in nature so offshore providers often scoff at our laws, but we still need to take stands on issues that affect our children and we need to work with and lobby other governments around the world and ICANN to help us find creative and effective solutions.

References:

1. Morality in Media

2. Bill to Protect Children by the Connecticut Attorney General

3. Calls to Pull Control of the Internet From the US Department of Commerce

4. The Department of Commerce and ICANN MOU

News.com put out a call for suggestions on how to protect kids online. (1)

I always wonder what “protecting kids online” means since it is used so loosely and so often with hidden agendas. John Stossel recently stated that we don’t have to worry about our kids being kidnapped, wrongly in my opinion. (2) After all are child predators any better than kidnappers? (3)

Anyway I am always glad to see the news trying to sort out this topic. Unfortunately they rarely do a thorough job and often create more falsehoods by their lack of research when it comes to the real issues of how to protect children online.

Although I agree that parents must take responsibility for what their kids see online, I also think that the governments and corporations need to do more.

There are tons of free adult content sites online. This free content is used to lure users (and ultimately children) to adult sites.

I would like to see a law that requires adult content purveyors to require a credit card before passing out their content. This would at least make it much more difficult for under aged visitors to get access to adult content.

As far as I’m concerned, companies that make pornography accessible to children are no better than child pornographers.

1. Call for Ideas
2. Worry in America
3. Child Predators Online

The following was posted earlier this year - around May, 2006

Re-thinking The Entire Issue - How to Prevent Access to Porn By Children Â

We believe that the Internet is a wonderful resource for everyone, but especially for families and children. Past efforts to “protect” children from predators and pornography online have focused on creating separate children’s Internets.

We oppose that type of solution. Children need and deserve to be able to surf the Internet as freely as they are able to enjoy playing safely in their neighborhoods. In fact we think that it is their right.

Let’s figure out ways to separate the adult content not the children. The Internet is too important a resource to give up to the adult trade.

AFSAC has been here for some time but recently we’ve decided to convert our site to a blog. Our entries most often are a series of letters responding to the issues that come up. Here is our old site for a historical perspective. Our goal however is to become pro-active rather than reactive. I’ve had this issue on my heart and mind for a long time. There are so many valid viewpoints. I think we finally have come up with the best of all solutions…

That solution is to prevent the viewing of pornographic images by minors online by requiring adult sites to get credit card data before allowing access.Â

Today most adult sites portray a certain amount of adult material for free. It is relatively easy to find and access, even by minors. If adult site operators were required to get a credit card first they could still do their business (yes we must maintain our freedom expression) but this would go a long way towards limiting access to minors.Â

I can already hear the critics saying that all we’d be doing is making it easier for off shore pornography competitors. Well quite frankly I am speaking only for Americans and I think it’s time that we do something about this growing problem.

If you agree (and even if you don’t) please write to us.

————–

The following was originally posted around May, 2006

If You Allow Children to View Pornography, You Are A Child Pornographer.

That’s my opinion. It is not the legal definition of “child pornography” in the United States but I think anyone with a decent moral compass would agree that for us to allow children to easily view pornography is wrong. Showing children pornography is also a common tool for pedophiles in their pursuit of victims.

A recent sting by the Riverside Police department in cooperation with Perverted Justice caught over 50 men in a period of two days attempting to meet children to have sex. Many of them used pornography as part of their methods. Some sent pictures of themselves and some just pointed kids to these types of pictures during their conversations.Â

If this is any indication of the pervasiveness of this problem then we as a society have a serious problem that needs serious solutions. The Internet has changed the world. We can no longer afford to let Internet policy happen in the absence of concern about what goes on with our children online.Â

We would never allow our neighborhoods to be safe havens for pornographers and pedophiles and we must not allow the Internet to be their safe haven either. Our children are much more important than the rights of pornographers and pedophiles.Â

Our children should have the right to the free unencumbered use of the Internet and we should not have to worry about them running across pornography online. The Victims of Crime Assistance League (VOCAL)Â in NSW Australia defines “Child Sexual Abuse” as follows…

“It is any act of a sexual nature committed on a young person or child. An adult adolescent or older, more advanced child can use their superior power and authority to involve a child in any sexual activity. This includes touching or fondling of the private parts of or by the child displaying photographing or filming a child for sexual purposes, exposing children’s sexual organs, pornography, including the child in adult sexual behaviour, sexual penetration of any part of the child by any part of the offender’s body.”

I agree with this definition. If you do as well then why do we as a society continue to allow pornographers free access to our children via the Internet.

As I write this article the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) is preparing to approve the new .XXX domain name. The momentum was slowed in 2005 but not stopped. Proponents of this new Top Level Domain (TLD) are trying to force the board at ICANN to finally approve this TLD basically by calling them chicken and stating that they are a puppet of the U.S. Department of Commerce. They think that the forces of business are enough to stop the problem of access to pornography by our children.Â

This is a problem that can only be stopped by our governments.It will not be solved by the addition of a new .XXX TLD. All that is doing is pandering to business interests who seem to me by their actions to have little regard for the safety of our children on the Internet and are more concerned with profits.

I’ve thought about the problem for years and my conclusion is that the best solution is to require adult sites to stop giving free access to pornography unless and until a potential site visitor checks in with a valid credit card proving that they are an adult.Â

Today most adult web sites give out “free samples” via their sites or via e-mail. These samples are often viewed by minors.Â

That is just wrong and should not be allowed.

————–

The following was originally posted around March, 2006

Confusing .XXX Proposals

Senator Baucus from Montana and Senator Mark Pryor of Arkansas are proposing a .xxx Internet domain name with requirements that adult content be located only there.The actual text of the proposal is not out yet but if it forces existing pornographic sites to relocate on .xxx this may be a good thing.Â

The problem is that an earlier proposal  .xxx is up for approval any day now at ICANN in a flawed format. By proposing this now the Senators may actually be helping the wrong people.Â

The .xxx domain name proposal in it’s present form only makes more room for pornography on the Internet. The proponents are staunchly against any requirements that adult material be relocated there.Â

They have even funded a war chest of $250 000 which is slated to fight any legislation like this. From their actions the organization who is promoting the .XXX domain name seems to have no interest in protecting children and seems only interested in getting their baby (.xxx) created.Â

They know how difficult it will be to force adult webmasters to abandon their .com addresses and migrate to a new domain. .XXX proponents have created what I see as a front organization the IFFOR with stated goals to “safeguard children” but whose board would have only one representative out of seven that would stand for children’s protection. The rest would stand for business interests and the adult trade.

Adult webmasters will never give up their valuable .com domains for a new unproven .xxx. They just won’t do it without the force of law. I have rallied against the .xxx program for a long time but I now feel that there is a better solution to the problem of children’s easy access to pornography online. Simply stated…  Â

Access to adult content should be prohibited unless and until a potential viewer enters a valid credit card number. Adult site operators should not be allowed to give out free samples to any visitors.

This “Free Sample Adult Material” should only be allowed once a user has entered a valid credit card to prove that they are 18 or older.  Most adult sites give away plenty of access to adult material to anyone that will fill in a simple form stating they are above 18. The only thing that stands between a child and that child’s access to adult content is a little white lie with no perceived consequences.Â

There are countless directories that aggregate free adult content and get paid for referring surfers to the free samples. This makes access for kids very easy. But young children 18 or under don’t have easy access to a credit card (without their parents consent) so a requirement that no free samples be shown without a credit card having been entered could go a long way to prevent access of adult materials to kids.  Â

Certainly it will be argued that this only hurts US proprietors but we need to draw a line in the sand on this issue.Â

Our kids are getting hurt more and more every day because of it. This is a complex issue but there are much more complex problems being solved in the name of the almighty dollar. How much more valuable our the hearts and souls of our children?  Something that works needs to be done soon.Â

Lastly the reason I think this may be the best solution is that I’m not sure that we’ll ever get past the constitutional defenses on the .xxx solution.Â

Do I think that .xxx should be approved? Absolutely not. I see no reason to legitimize pornography online. There is plenty enough of it without giving it special treatment.  If it does get approved I just hope that our government will make sure that it includes a requirement that adult material move there but the credit card idea seems more feasible to me.   Â

I’m actually quite sad because I watch the industry closely and I think that in spite of all its flaws we will before April of this year see the approval of .XXX (with no restrictions) by ICANN. I hope I’m wrong.   Unfortunately our government leaders (both Democrat and Republican) come up with proposals that don’t solve problems. I’m sure they are well meaning but so far most proposals have been ineffective.     Â

Apparently our blog was hacked. That’s the way it goes. We’ll be slowly adding our posts and resources back. Thanks for your patience.