toolbar
Search this site!
 


May 17, 2002

Dear Subscribers:

Here's our lineup for this newsy mid-May week:


~~~~~~~~~~Support NetFamilyNews.org!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To support this free, nonprofit service, please visit our contributions page at one of these locations....

  Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

(Making a donation is fast, easy, secure, and tax-deductible!)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Family Tech: Words for Congress; Computer monitors explained

  1. Words for Congress: Sneak preview

    Many well-intentioned members of the US Congress need a little help in understanding how laws and lawmakers can help protect online kids, suggests SafeKids.com's Larry Magid. To their credit, he adds, many of them know that. Which is why a large turnout is expected at a meeting next week between lawmakers and experts in children's online safety. Larry will speak at the event, sponsored by the Congressional Internet Caucus, a bipartisan group of about 170 members of the House and Senate. You, our readers, are the audience at Larry's dress rehearsal - his Family Tech column this week in the San Jose Mercury News. In it, he offers focus for where help is really needed for online kids.

  2. Pixels, fonts, and other monitor issues

    Ever wonder just exactly what a pixel is? In his latest New York Times column, "Pamper Your Pixels", Larry Magid clears up the mystery. Even better, he explains how to make your computer monitor - whether it's an LCD or CRT (he defines these terms as well) - easier on the eye and the wallet (when it's used to pay electricity bills). Many common questions, from text size to resolution to "sleep mode," are thoughtfully cleared up.

* * * *

COPA on hold - again

Right at this point in American history, the US government - including its top constitutional experts at the Supreme Court - is having a very hard time figuring out how to interpret its Constitution's First Amendment. And the Internet is to blame.

What is likely to come out of this unprecedented struggle to protect online kids and free speech at the same time is one of three things: 1) a national set of standards for decency, obscenity, and what's appropriate for children, 2) a decision that a national standard is not possible to legislate in or for this large, diverse country, or 3) a decision that a national standard may not be particularly useful when applied to an international medium - the Internet.

The latest manifestation of the struggle was the Supreme Court's "fractured decision" (as the New York Times put it) this week to send COPA, the Child Online Protection Act of 1998, back down to a lower federal court in Philadelphia for further review. The decision was fractured not only because it didn't decide the law's fate, but also because it both upheld the law and kept its enforcement on hold.

[Shortly after it was passed in late '98, COPA - which "imposes prison sentences and fines of up to $100,000 for placing material that is 'harmful to minors' on a Web site available to those under the age of 17," says the Times - was blocked by the Philadelphia court. The Supreme Court's decision this week was responding to that lower court's decision. COPA was Congress's second attempt at protecting children from online pornography, after the Supreme Court struck down the Communications Decency Act in 1997.]

It appears that one of the reasons for COPA indecision this week was the Internet's effect on an important precedent courts have relied upon: community standards (local courts making decisions based on local community standards). The Philadelphia federal court had blocked COPA because it said the community-standards test "cannot be constitutionally extended to cases involving material posted online. The appeals court said reliance on such a standard would empower the most conservative communities in the nation to dictate the content of the Web," reports the Christian Science Monitor. In sending the law back to Philadelphia this week, at least five Supreme Court justices disagreed, the Monitor adds. "But at the same time, they made clear that COPA may nonetheless be unconstitutional for other reasons," and the Supreme Court wanted the lower court to consider those reasons, too, hinting that it ultimately might find the law unconstitutional.

So we have the US's top constitutional authorities disagreeing on whether local community standards can apply to content on the international Internet and on whether to maintain the community-standards precedent.

"It is essential to answer the vexing question of what it means to evaluate Internet material 'as a whole' when everything on the Web is connected to everything else," said Justice Anthony B. Kennedy, in one of the three-justice opinions in this week's decision (quoted in the Times and available in full here). But the Court wasn't ready to answer the question this week. COPA will eventually wind up back in the Supreme Court justices' hands, at which point they probably will have decided many more Internet-related cases.

Here are only some of the reasons why the Internet poses such a challenge to courts in the US and probably everywhere:

The Associated Press explains it, from a US perspective, this way: "Material that is indecent but not obscene is protected by the First Amendment. Adults may see or purchase it, but children may not. For the owner of the corner store, it is relatively easy to sell to adults but not to children. The inherent anonymity of the Internet, and the freedom of movement it offers, make it difficult to offer adult material only to adults." That's from an AP piece that appeared in the Washington Post this week.

Here's other coverage of the Supreme Court's decision in the Washington Post, at the BBC, and in Wired News . And here's an analysis of the COPA decision this week by Internet lawyer, Gigalaw.com founder, and columnist Doug Isenberg. All 54 pages of the justices' opinions this week can be downloaded in pdf format from the Center for Democracy and Technology's site.

What would you like to see the US Supreme Court decide on children's online safety and national standards for child-appropriate content? Email us anytime via feedback@netfamilynews.org.

* * * *

A subscriber responds: Parents' action needed

Mary in North Carolina is not alone in her view that action is needed to stop kids' exposure to pornography on the Net (see last week's issue). This week subscriber Diana in Arizona emailed us with passionate support for Mary's concern and activism. Her message is fairly long, speaking to a challenge in her own family with a son's attraction to sexual content on the Web, so we'll start it below and link you to Diana's full message here....

"We cannot allow this [porn on the Net] to be ignored. 'The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing,' by Edmund Burke, says it all.

"There are more people angry and disgusted by this than those who are indifferent about it or outright addicted to the pornography. There is no reason why there can't be a '.porn' designation on all [porn] Web sites so that those who do not wish to go there will never be forced to endure these disgraceful images.

"We must organize, organize, organize. There is no other solution. We must develop a network of strong-willed, caring parents who are absolutely determined to get a handle on this once and for all."

For the rest of Diana's message, click here. We always welcome your feedback, and (with your permission) often publish it for the benefit of all readers. Do email us.

* * * *

Web News Briefs

  1. Teen's IM privileges taken away

    Here's someone who could've used some Net ethics education, it appears. A Boston-area teenager has been charged with using instant messaging to harass six girls and their families. "Under the terms of a pretrial probation agreement signed Monday by the unidentified teen and others involved in the case, the resident of North Reading, Mass., risks criminal prosecution if he engages in 'unsupervised' use of IM and other computing applications," CNET reports. There will also be civil proceedings against the accused, Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly announced this week, saying the boy's instant messages threatened the girls with violent and sexually explicit language.

  2. The lighter side of MP3 file-sharing

    The litigation-rich saga of MP3 file-sharing (formerly known as the Napster story) is about as complex as the genealogy of Luke and Leia Skywalker, but it can also be as entertaining. Matt Richtel of the New York Times had fun writing a piece about all this, so we think you (like us) will have fun reading it. It's about Kazaa, music file-sharing software that's kind of a morphed version of Napster. It makes the recording industry just as angry as Napster did, because it enables Net users to steal copyrighted music, but the recording industry is still (as of this writing) trying to figure out whether to add Kazaa - now owned by an Australia-based company registered in Vanuatu (we told you it's complex) - to its list of lawsuits. ("Recording industry" is short for the Recording Industry Association of America, but we have a feeling America isn't the only country represented in all this litigation.)

    Just to give you a feel for the irony in the Kazaa chapter of the MP3 story: The fact that Kazaa's publisher, Sharman Networks, is registered in Vanuatu in the South Pacific is key. Sharman has been less than forthcoming about itself until very recently. Sharman told writer Richtel it's not that the company is hiding, just that it didn't clarify its situation. "This distinction between hiding and not clarifying is important," concludes Richtel, "with broad implications. For instance, the accounting firm Arthur Andersen might note that it didn't hide documents related to Enron, just that it failed to clarify the documents would have to be viewed in very thin strips." Besides the fact that it's entertaining sometimes, we follow this story because, like child online safety, it's another case study of how opposing interests are going to resolve a problem aggravated by the global, boundary-less, anarchic Internet.

    Meanwhile, CNET reports that Kazaa's owners have found some powerful allies in an effort to "overhaul the way record labels are paid for music and other content distributed on the Net." And a new study finds that music file-sharing is good for the recording industry (though the industry disagrees), reports the Washington Post.

  3. Napster no longer

    On a much more serious note, Napster appeared on the verge of bankruptcy this week, a victim, it seems, of being first to market. Founder Shawn Fanning quit the revolutionary online file-swapping service he created in his Boston dorm room in a mass exodus Tuesday that almost certainly signals the end for the once-feisty music service, reports SiliconValley.com. CEO Konrad Hilbers and three other senior executives also resigned, "after infighting on the board led to the collapse of negotiations between Napster and German media conglomerate Bertelsmann." Here are The Guardian's and Wired News's cogent coverage of Napster's demise. And here's a super article in Time that explains the whole file-sharing, CD-burning, digital-music phenomenon, complete with background and both consumer and "Big Music" perspectives.

  4. 'Technology Counts' '02

    We think parents may be as interested as educators in Education Week's fifth-annual "Technology Counts" report. It looks at the pluses and minuses of e-learning - putting high school courses online - from many perspectives. There's anecdotal evidence, such as one Massachusetts high school's experience in using online classes, as well as plenty of statistics. Here's a sampler:

    • 12 states have established online high school programs and five others are developing them.
    • 25 states allow for the creation of so-called cyber charter schools.
    • 32 states have e-learning initiatives under way.
    • 10 states are piloting or planning to administer online testing, and Oregon and South Dakota are already using Web-based assessments.
    • 40,000 to 50,000 K-12 students will have enrolled in an online course by the end of the 2001-02 school year.

  5. UK school communications via email

    Phone wires, not backpacks, will soon be carrying most school messages home to UK parents, the BBC reports. The move, part of the government's drive to ensure its services were available online by 2005, is possible because almost all schools in England are now hooked up to the Internet, as are four out of 10 households, the BBC adds. Not all educators are supportive, but the service will be voluntary and parents will be able to agree in advance to receiving school communications via email.

  6. E-dating services

    "The golden age of online dating is upon us," reports Salon.com, citing the popularity of services at Match.com (reporting a 195% increase in paid subscriberships over the same quarter last year) and personal ads at Yahoo.com, Bust.com, and other sites both general and specific. And the "industry" is evolving, as are the way people present themselves in personal ads. "In keeping with current advertising trends, today's online singles market themselves not by highlighting their best traits, but by creating an imaginary self that's impressively snarky and carefree," Salon reports, showing that people seeking dates are taking advantage of the Internet's anonymity. Salon looks at the sociology of all this, with smart questions like, "What does it mean to peddle yourself so effectively before you even meet your prospective partner? Can there possibly be any room left for the real, flawed, fragile human behind the ad?"

    Those and other questions might be useful for family discussions about marketing-vs.-reality wherever one "meets" strangers in cyberspace - dating sites, personal ads, chat, diaries, or instant-messaging, all of which are popular among teenagers. Another thing parents might want to know is that online dating services can also be fronts for dangerous, illegal online activity. In a recent interview, the mother of a 15-year-old who was lured out of state to meet a sexual predator told us the man worked full time for an Internet dating service.

  7. Australian ISPs must provide filtering

    The Australian Broadcasting Authority announced last week that Internet service providers in that country must provide customers with filtering software or services, reports AustralianIT News. The filtering won't be free but, under the new orders, the cost to customers may not exceed the ISPs' own cost in providing them.

  8. Would 'dot-kids' work for publishers?

    Is it likely that kids' sites would want to be in a dot-kids zone on the Web? That's one question considered in a report this week on a ".kids.us" domain being considered on Capitol Hill. Bonus.com, a games site for kids, was one example cited in the Associated Press piece (at CNN.com). The popular Bonus.com said it wouldn't publish in the dot-kids area because kids, teachers, and parents are so accustomed to typing ".com" into their browsers. Of course that's not true for all kids sites - a recent email to use from KidFu.com said that site would definitely participate. The problem is, a dot-kids domain needs "critical mass" to be effective as an online-safety solution - if the sites aren't there, kids won't be.

  9. Online gaming's future?

    In what Butterfly.net believes will change the online games world, new technology is out that allows millions of players around the world to participate in a game at the same time, the Washington Post reports. "Current technology is limited by the number of players whom each server can accommodate, usually under 1,000," the Post adds. "Butterfly's software eliminates those restrictions by joining servers into clusters, allow millions of players to interact simultaneously." Users will have to buy a software product that will enable them to participate. Gamemakers Vivendi and Electronic Arts have already bought the server-side technology, which Butterfly says will broaden their markets into the less technically literate mainstream.

* * * *

Share with a Friend!! If you find the newsletter useful, won't you tell your friends and colleagues? We would much appreciate your referral. To subscribe, they can just send an email to subscribe@netfamilynews.org - no need to type anything in the Subject field or the body of the message.

We are always happy to hear from potential sponsors and distribution partners as well. If you'd like to make a tax-deductible contribution or become a sponsor, please email us or send a check payable to:

Net Family News, Inc.
P.O. Box 1283
Madison, CT 06443

That does it for this week. Have a great weekend!

Sincerely,

Anne Collier, Editor

Net Family News


HOME | newsletter | subscribe | links | supporters | about | feedback


Copyright 2002 Net Family News, Inc. | Our Privacy Policy | Kindly supported by the UK Domain Name Registration Centre.