CIPA and antiterrorism legislation: what they mean for America's libraries

摘要

Beginning March 25, a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania will hear the case of the American Library Association and nine other plaintiffs versus the U.S. Department of Justice on the matter of the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) (AL, Sept. 2001, p. 16). Let us be clear--the CIPA lawsuit is not about protecting our children from illegal materials on the Internet. We all want our children to have positive and enlightening experiences online. This lawsuit is about a well-intended but wholly misguided federal mandate that would have America's public and school libraries that accept federal funds for E-rate and Internet-related uses of the Library Services and Technology Act to install filtering software on all terminals with Internet access. Research clearly demonstrates that there is no filtering technology able to filter only illegal sites (visual depictions under the CIPA statute are defined as obscenity, child pornography, or "harmful to minors"), and reveals that a good deal of constitutionally protected speech is also blocked. CIPA challenges the fundamental right for communities to decide for themselves what, if any, protective mechanisms are appropriate. The final report of the Children's Online Protection Act Commission in 2000 recommended increased law enforcement efforts to enforce existing statutes on illegal Internet activity as defined by CIPA. In a global Internet environment this is ahuge challenge, although its success would make CIPA legislation unnecessary. DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION On Christmas Day 1820, a 77-year-old Thomas Jefferson wrote from Monticello to his friend Thomas Ritchie: "But I am far from presuming to direct the reading of my fellow citizens, who are good enough judges themselves of what is worthy of their reading.