Again, in our country, most speech is protected under the First Amendment. The exceptions have to do with speech whose effect is deemed likely to be so harmful -- and so without any redeeming social value -- that it becomes illegal. Examples include libel (punishable after the fact, post-publication), "fighting words" and obscenity.

Of particular concern when we consider an open communications system in which any and all ideas can be brought forth (which, in general, we see as a good thing) are the potential harmful effects those ideas might have on people we think are most vulnerable ... like children. Remember one of the recurring fears about new communication technology: that it will degrade our morals and, especially those of our children.

Obscenity law and attempts to apply it to the Internet offer a great example of how socially beneficial goals, such as protecting children, can conflict with other socially beneficial goals, such as protecting free speech and an "open marketplace of ideas."

In this country, obscenity is illegal -- it is not protected by the First Amendment. But pornography is legal, as is a whole lot of other stuff that someone somewhere may find indecent or otherwise offensive (can you say "wardrobe malfunction"?) but does not cross the legal threshold into obscenity.

That threshold was established in the 1950s by the "Roth test" and updated, more or less, in the 1970s by the "Miller test." According to the Miller test, material is indeed obscene if and only if:

Can you see why this test would be even more difficult to apply online than it is offline (where it is difficult enough!)?

By the way, while pornography involving adults is legal in all states, child pornography (involving visual images) is illegal in all states. Kiddie porn is illegal partly because that law deals primarily with CONDUCT (harm to an actual child caused by creating the images) rather than CONTENT (the images themselves). But how about digital simulation of kids engaging in sex acts -- is that also illegal?

Communications Decency Act (CDA)
and Child Online Protection Act (COPA)

OK, so obscenity is illegal. But what about other stuff, particularly stuff that many of us might find at least distasteful -- and especially, what about the fact that online, virtually everything is just a click away? In the world of print, the porn can be kept behind the counter at the Handimart and sold only to adults. Online...no virtual counters. It's all out in the open.

In the 1990s, Congress tried twice -- unsuccessfully, twice -- to pass laws restricting children's access to indecent (not obscene) material.

Let's Form a Committee!
Perhaps finally realizing it wasn’t going to get anywhere with its various unconstitutional attempts to make porn inaccessible to children online, Congress punted. It formed a Commission on Online Child Protection to “study methods to help reduce access by minors to sexually explicit material.”

After much deliberation, the commission concluded in 2000 that no single technology or method will effectively protect kids from harmful material online. The only hope is to combine:

* Public education.
* Consumer empowerment technologies.
* Increased enforcement of existing laws.
* Industry action.

* FILTERING SOFTWARE: There are lots of mostly private companies offering software that uses such ratings systems to filter or block certain sites. Private companies also may rate (and block) sites themselves, though their services can be both imprecise and highly subjective.