in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards, sexual or excretory activities or organs... shall be fined under Title 1, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than two years...." This act outlaws any material deemed "obscene" and imposes fines up to $100 000 and prison terms up to two years on anyone who knowingly makes "indecent" material available to children under 18, as directly quoted from section 502. The measure had problems from the start. The key issue to senators like Exon is whether to classify the internet as a print medium like newspapers, or a broadcast medium like television. Unfortunately it is a communications medium and should be treated as such. If such legislation was passed to control telephone conversations, many teenagers would get the electric chair at age fifteen. The Communications Decency Act never passed, but a line in the telecommunications bill that did pass denounces anything "indecent" being transmitted. The legal ramifications are still being fought over in government as the vague nature of the clause leaves it open to multiple interpretations. As the issue stands now, there are only two real solutions. One would be the adoption of government controls that would infringe on peoples rights to free speech, but also make the net a safe place to be. The other would for parents to use filtering software to control what their computer is receiving. Government controls may seem attractive as it limits information like bomb plans and chemical analysis of explosive that terrorist groups or your next door neighbor can exploit to do evil. This could help the world to be a safer place. Controls like this would protect the interest of developing minds or sensitive people and make the risk of them viewing obscene material almost zero. This way parents need not worry what their children are looking at when they sit them down infront of the computer. ...
