EFFector       Vol. 11, No. 13       Sep. 23, 1998
                              [email protected]
  A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation     ISSN 1062-9424

 IN THE 141st ISSUE OF EFFECTOR:

    * ALERT: House Commerce Committee Poised to Pass CDA II: Contact
      Legislators ASAP!
         + ACTION
         + MESSAGES
         + COMMITTEE CONTACT INFO
         + SUMMARY
    * EFF calls for recognition of rights in Domain Naming System
      administration
    * Administrivia

  See http://www.eff.org for more information on EFF activities &
  alerts!
    _________________________________________________________________



 ALERT: House Commerce Committee Poised to Pass CDA II: Contact Legislators
                                    ASAP!

  Electronic Frontier Foundation Alert, Sept. 23, 1998 (partially
  expires Sept. 24, 1998; please do not redistribute after Oct. 1, 1998;
  check Web site for update.)

  (This is another unfortunately short-notice alert; sometimes Congress
  acts rapidly and with little warning, several times in a row.)

 ACTION:

  Please IMMEDIATELY call and fax the House Commerce Committee (contact
  info below), and urge them to to REJECT the Internet censorship bill
  known as the "Child Online Protection Act" (a.k.a. "CDA II"), H.R.
  3783.

  Next visit the alert page of the Blue Ribbon Campaign for Online Free
  Speech:
    http://www.eff.org/br
  and follow the instructions to contact your own legislators to oppose
  this and related legislation (you can send your legislators a free fax
  via the Web!)

  Please JOIN THE CAMPAIGN!  We need ALL EFF MEMBERS AND EFFECTOR READERS
  with Web sites to please actively join the campaign by putting Blue
  Ribbon icons and links to the Blue Ribbon Page on your own Web pages!
                   ___________________________________

 MESSAGES:

  When contacting the Committee, if you wish to elaborate on why the
  Committee should reject this bill, here are some basic talking points:

   1. This legislation contains most of the unconstitutional flaws of
      the original CDA, and last week's Telecommunications Subcommittee
      markup made the bill even worse than it already was by introducing
      a prior restraint on free expression.
   2. Though the sponsors of this bill claim it is intended to address
      only commercial pornographers intentionally targeting minors, the
      actual language of the bill is vague and overbroad, and would
      likely sweep in much more than explicit for-profit visual
      materials. The bill will censor a wide variety of legitimate,
      protected expression, for adults as well as children.
   3. Congress's own posting of the Starr report would likely violate
      H.R. 3783.
   4. It is the responsibility (and right) of parents, not the federal
      government, to decide what is or is not appropriate for minors to
      have access to, and to supervise minors. In the classroom, this is
      a local, not federal, issue.
   5. What is appropriate for a 5-year-old is not the same thing as what
      is appropriate for a 16-year-old, and this bill fails to take
      account of this basic fact.
   6. Intentionally providing a minor with "harmful matter", online or
      offline, is already illegal under general obscenity and
      harmful-to-minor statutes. Congress cannot expand this to a ban on
      all online publication (which the bill amounts to; the Supreme
      Court has already found that the kind of age verification this
      bill, like the CDA, calls for is impractical.
   7. The bill is unnecessary - as parents learn how to supervise their
      children's online activities (directly, or indirectly with the use
      of filtering software), the risk of children's exposure to
      inappropriate online materials is declining.

  Feel free to use your own wording of course. The last point can be
  skipped when contacting the Committee by voice phone, since it is long
  and rather technical. Other points can be shortened for voice calls,
  e.g., "The bill will censor a lot more than the commercial
  pornographers it aims at," for point 2.
                   ___________________________________

 COMMITTEE CONTACT INFO:

  The House Commerce Committee
    * Phone: +1-202-225-2927
    * Fax: +1-202-225-1919
    * E-mail: [email protected] (it's important to phone or fax
      first!)

  There is insufficient time to contact individual legislators' offices.
  The markup is likely to be completed by early afternoon at the latest.

  More information on contacting Congress is available at:
    http://www.eff.org/congress/
                   ___________________________________

 SUMMARY:

  The Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer Protection
  of the House Commerce Committee passed a revised (and worsened)
  version of legislation intended to establish restrictions on online
  publication of content deemed "harmful to minors" on the Net, on Thu.,
  Sep. 17, 1998. The full House Commerce Committee is now taking up the
  legislation and is ready to pass it Thu., Sep. 23, 1998.

  The untitled bill, which many refer to as "CDA II", would block many
  adults from receiving or posting a wide variety of legitimate material
  online that falls under vague harm criteria and includes many of the
  same constitutional defects as the original Communications Decency Act
  (CDA). The new version even introduces a prior restraint on
  publication, which the Supreme Court has already ruled
  unconstitutional. The bill is a completely useless measure intended to
  curry favor with theocratic organizations and voters, and does not
  actually do anything to protect children.

  In the name of ostensibly protecting young users of the Internet, CDA
  II is intended to enact a wide-ranging ban on Web posting of material
  deemed "harmful to minors." The bill number is H.R. 3783, and it is a
  companion bill to the Senate's S. 1482, passed as an amendment to an
  appropriations bill that cleared the Senate over the summer. H.R. 3783
  was introduced by Rep. Michael Oxley (R-OH-5).

    _________________________________________________________________



 EFF calls for recognition of rights in Domain Naming System administration

  FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 23, 1998


                 True Internet Democracy Undermined
           by Latest Agreement Over Domain Naming System

Electronic Frontier Foundation Sends Open Letter and Revised Bylaws
to IANA & NSI Emphasizing Need to Protect Free Expression on the Net


  SAN FRANCISCO, CA -- Charging that a proposed plan to revamp the
  Internet Domain Naming System (DNS) would threaten both the democratic
  governance of the Internet and basic human rights principles of free
  expression and due process, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
  today called for substantial changes in the scheme.

  EFF's call came in an open letter to the Internet community and a set
  of proposed bylaw changes sent to the Internet Assigned Numbers
  Authority (IANA) and Network Solutions, Inc. (NSI). Together, IANA and
  NSI have drafted a "New IANA" plan to revamp the DNS processes, in
  response to a Clinton Administration White Paper calling for changes
  that reflect the global nature of the Net and which address
  inefficiencies, over-centralization and several other current
  problems. The "New IANA" plan is considered the main contender in
  satisfying these requirements. EFF argues that the plan fundamentally
  fails to meet these requirements.

  EFF Board member John Gilmore said, "we believe that the latest
  IANA/NSI proposal does not follow the requirements set forth by the
  White Paper for protecting openness and free expression."

  "There are several organizations quietly registering complaints about
  the proposal with the architects of the New IANA," he continued.
  "We've tried working from within the process to get our specific
  concerns related to free speech into the Bylaws and nothing has
  happened. EFF sees this as such a serious impediment to the future of
  the Internet that we feel compelled to make this public announcement."

  What's at stake is the executive responsibility for the technical
  aspects of the Internet, as the New IANA will oversee the management
  of the Internet's infrastructure, including domain name registration
  and setting technological standards and protocols. The latest
  agreement between IANA and NSI, which is articulated in a fourth draft
  of the Bylaws for the New IANA, is close to being finalized since the
  NSI contract over the DNS is about to expire at the end of this month.

  "The U.S. and other governments, Internet users, and standards
  organizations asked for an international, legally binding, democractic
  body governed by the full spectrum of Internet users," said Gilmore.
  "What it's getting instead is another U.S.-centric, closed corporation
  that would be run by an elite group shielded from public scrutiny."

  Specifically, EFF believes that the proposed New IANA Bylaws do not
  protect the public in the following four areas:

    * The lack of transparency and openness in the Bylaws prevents the
      public from participating in the governance of the DNS;
    * The Bylaws are silent on the importance of protecting free
      expression, which leaves the public vulnerable to arbitrary
      decisions that violate the basic right to speak freely;
    * The transition arrangements written into the Bylaws undermine the
      authority of the newly formed IANA board, rendering their
      articulated powers irrelevant; and
    * The lack of public disclosure of key contracts, and certain other
      clauses assist in the perpetuation of existing monopoly
      structures.

  EFF has crafted a set of enhanced and revised Bylaws that address
  these four areas, which are vital to protect the public interest.

  "As a basic principle, any foundation for governance of a
  communications system, such as the Internet, should stand on the
  fundamental human right of free expression," said EFF President Barry
  Steinhardt. "The strongest guarantees of free speech and publication,
  due process, and nondiscriminatory administration should be written
  into the charter of any organization empowered with Internet
  oversight."

  "True Internet-wide democracy has to happen now," added Gilmore. "If
  we were to enact the Bylaws agreed to by IANA and NSI today we would
  be turning our backs on the possibility of an open governance of the
  Internet."

  EFF has been tracking the DNS governance issue for the past several
  years. One of EFF's Board members is on the IANA Transition Advisory
  Group; another has agreed to join the Interim Board; a third was
  instrumental in the CORE effort to provide a capable competitor in
  global domain registration. In addition, EFF's legal staff has tracked
  and commented on numerous proposed policies and drafts, while our
  activists have closely followed the controversies online and in the
  press.

  EFF's Letter and Revised Bylaws sent to IANA and NSI are on the Web
  at: http://www.eff.org/pub/GII_NII/DNS_control/

  Version 4 of the Proposed Bylaws for the New IANA, agreed to by
  IANA/NSI, are on the Web at: http://www.iana.org/bylaws-coop.html
                   ___________________________________

  The Electronic Frontier Foundation is one of the leading civil
  liberties organizations devoted to ensuring that the Internet remains
  the world's first truly global vehicle for free speech, and that the
  privacy and security of all on-line communication is preserved.
  Founded in 1990 as a nonprofit, public interest organization, EFF is
  based in San Francisco, California. EFF maintains an extensive archive
  at http://www.eff.org of information on electronic privacy, online
  free speech, and encryption policy.

    _________________________________________________________________

                                Administrivia

  EFFector is published by:

  The Electronic Frontier Foundation
  1550 Bryant St., Suite 725
  San Francisco CA 94103-4832 USA
  +1 415 436 9333 (voice)
  +1 415 436 9993 (fax)

  Editor: Stanton McCandlish, Program Director/Webmaster ([email protected])

  Membership & donations: [email protected]
  Legal services: [email protected]
  General EFF, legal, policy or online resources queries: [email protected]

  Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged.
  Signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of EFF. To
  reproduce signed articles individually, please contact the authors for
  their express permission. Press releases and EFF announcements may be
  reproduced individually at will.

  To subscribe to EFFector via email, send message body of:
  subscribe effector-online
  to [email protected], which will add you to a subscription list for
  EFFector. To unsubscribe, send a similar message body, like so:
  unsubscribe effector-online

  Please tell [email protected] to manually remove you from the list if this
  does not work for some reason.

  Back issues are available at:
  http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Newsletters/EFFector

  To get the latest issue, send any message to
  [email protected] (or [email protected]), and it will be mailed to
  you automagically. You can also get:
  http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Newsletters/EFFector/current.html

You are viewing proxied material from gopher.meulie.net. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.