nforce any laws, which would be written for the Internet. This aspect is so critical, because otherwise any laws would be in vain. If for example the US government were to prohibit all material about flowers on the web, the law would be useless since someone in the US could access such content from Holland for example, therefore unless Holland agrees with the US on its internet laws there would be no way to enforce any laws regarding the world wide web. Once the ambiguities on how to enforce “Internet laws” have been cleared, the laws have to be written, thus in the case of pornography one has to come to a consensus about what is right and what to do. It is this aspect which causes the headaches, because when it comes to the Internet all rules change, especially when it comes to pornography on the Internet. It is discussed in the L.A. Times, how laws are written for governments which are restricted to territory, whereas territory is not defined in Cyberspace and thus “Law” becomes “irrelevant” as Lawrence Lessig, a law professor ant the University of Chicago states, and governments become undefined (3).The controversy about pornography on the web incorporates both moral and freedom-of-speech controversies, which are both very ambivalent since they deal with feelings. For instance someone who is against pornography in “real life” is bound to be against pornography on the web, on the other hand someone who might be an advocate of freedom of speech might be for pornography in real life, but against it on the web since his children are able to see it. Consequently a double standard is created which causes even more problems.One party such as a leader of a anti-pornography group called Enough is Enough, say that pornography has to be banned on the internet because there is too great of a risk that children can be exposed to pornography “And once they have seen it, it can never be e...
