MYTH: REGULATION WILL STIFLE THE INTERNET.
Many zealous techies make this claim, and their logic sounds fairly reasonable.
The truth is, however, that the internet is already being regulated by bodies
such as the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority,(IANA),
the Internet Corporation of Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN),
and even the US government. Speifically, these bodies released a publication in 1994 called
RFC 1700 that identified certain port
numbers as "reserved" for specific use. To add a few more ports to the "reserved" list for
the use of "adult" content would not disrupt the workings of the internet at all.
Q: WHAT MAKES CP80 DIFFERENT FROM ALL THE PREVIOUS "ANTI-PORNOGRAPHY" LEGISLATURE THAT HAS FAILED?
While very well intentioned, all of the so-called "anti-pornography" legislature have been fundamentally flawed. Two of the major shortcomings of the .xxx initiative were that there was no forced compliance, and that it placed too great an economic burden on existing companies. w3.org has a really good article that talks about more weaknesses of this initiative. Both the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA) and the Children Online Protection Act (COPA) were ruled unconstitutional because the language defining illegal material was too vague, thus violating the 1st amendment (see the Ashcroft v. ACLU ruling for more info).
With more specific definitions of what is considerd "obscene" and "inappropriate for minors", and forced compliance monitored by a government agency, CP80 has overcome these flaws. For a more in-depth treatise on this subject, see these articles from the CP80 foundation: prior statute attempts, statute definitions, and the ICPA statute summary.
Q: WILL A U.S. LAW REALLY BE EFFECTIVE?
This a great question. Many people say that since the internet is worldwide, a US law will be ineffective. They claim that
those who wish to serve the porn content will just go overseas. My response is, that's great! You see, every server
on the internet given a unique number called an IP address. IP addresses are distributed in chunks on a regional basis to one of 5 Regional Internet Registries (RIR's). Those IP addresses are then allocated by the RIR to individual countries under their jurisdiction. The IP address range given to each country is public knowledge. (See iana.org for IP addressing to the RIR's. Visit the individual RIR sites for IP addressing to individual countries.)
Thus, if I were a family, business, or public institution that wanted to ensure clean content for my users, I could allow port 80 into my computers and block all the IP addresses from countries that weren't in compliance with CP80. As countries begin to see that they are being blocked, they will pressure their own governments to join the CP80 movement. And for those people who aren't willing to "go without" some portions of the internet, they can can open all ports into their computer. That's the beauty of CP80 - it's an opt-in program.
Q: WON'T THIS VIOLATE FREEDOM OF SPEECH?
Another great question. The beauty of this proposal is that it in no way
adds any limitations to anyone's ability to produce, distribute, or
view pornographic content on the internet. Nor does it give the government any additional power to censor what is published on the internet (in legal-eze that's called "prior restraint"). Just like any film company can
produce R- or X- rated movies to their heart's content, those who wish to continue
produce or view internet pornography still can - on the appropriate channel. What CP80 DOES add is the ability
for those who wish to avoid pornographic content to turn off the adult port and shut off porn in their homes. It gives them freedom FROM
speech.
Q: HOW WILL WE DISTINGUISH BETWEEN PORNOGRAPHY AND ART?
This has been a hot debate whenever any sort of pornography legislature has been
discussed. What will differentiate a hard core porn site from a site that shows classical
nude art? Or what's to distinguish those sites from a medical site that discusses
sexually transmitted diseases? The answer to these questions is simple. The FCC has set indecency guidelines for what can air over public tv and radio stations (warning - the indecency guidelines document contains some indecent material for means of example).
The MPAA has a rating system that determines what children under the age of 18 can view.
The ESRB ratings do the same for video games. The point is, history has shown that
it perfectly feasible for a regulatory board to be established that can set standards determining
which content qualifies as "adult," and needs to be on the adult channel, and which content
is suitable for the family channel.
