DOPA, Deleting Online Predators Act of 2006, (HR 5319) has been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet.
Take a look to see if your legislator is on the Subcommittee and if so drop him/her an email/fax/letter today. Mine is - see my letter below.
Even though I believe the law is blatantly unconstitutional, that doesn't mean it won't get passed. As of today there are already 21 cosponsors.
My letter:
H.R. 5319, recently introduced by Rep. Michael Fitzpatrick (R-PA) has been referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet.
This bill should die a quick and painless death, as it is certainly an unconstitutional government prohibition of protected speech.
Although we share a concern for children, the bill would prohibit a wide swath of innocent speech, far beyond legally proscribable speech. When the original Children's Internet Protection Act was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, it was clear that the bill's aim was to proscribe obscenity, child pornography and material harmful to minors. This amendment would proscribe a wide range of social networking websites. Although such websites can be used by those with malevolent intent, they are also used by those who wish to share innocent common interests of all types.
The portion that directs the FTC to issue a consumer alert and website regarding the potential dangers to children of Internet child predators, including the potential danger of commercial social networking websites and chat rooms through which personal information about child users of such websites may be accessed by child predators is welcome, although legislation is probably not necessary to encourage such positive educational efforts.
Thank you.
Murphy doesn't get it- voters who are parents want to protect their kids from Internet predators. The last thing we want to do is pay taxes to support library funding where on-line predators can make use of free on-line services to view child pornography and other disgusting images. If the ACLU and Patrick Murhpy want to allow sexual predators to have unrestricted access to the iternet, then they should pay for it privately.
Posted by: lu | September 02, 2006 at 10:59 PM
On July 26, 2006, the House of Representatives voted 410-15 (7 Not Voting), on a Roll Call vote, to pass the bill as amended. For more, see DOPA of 2006 on WikiPedia. Also, from the Library Journal, "DOPA Passes House by Wide Margin; ALA Dismayed," July 28, 2006
Posted by: SafeLibraries.org | August 02, 2006 at 07:38 PM
myspace, friendster, facebook... These sites are basically the new rock and roll, the new rap music; essentially the new way for adults to lose their minds because they can't engage their own children and their lives.
What a waste of government time.
Posted by: connie | June 22, 2006 at 08:04 PM
Norma - that's the tough question. Don't have the answer. I wish they'd use a site that's primarily their own - they we'd have a good solution.
Posted by: Mary | June 06, 2006 at 12:58 PM
Norma,
Not sure what you're trying to say in your comment since the second sentence appears to be an incomplete thought. But I'm pretty sure you're heading down the wrong path if you think Mary Minow is suggesting ANYTHING that uses children for sex. You might want to read her post again...a tad more closely this time.
Lori
Posted by: Lori Ayre | June 06, 2006 at 11:44 AM
Sure is difficult to protect children from predators on the internet. And your suggestion for "social networks" that use children for sex?
Posted by: Norma | June 05, 2006 at 01:47 PM