http://nymag.com/news/features/70985/
I came across this article and thought it was really interesting, especially in light of the obsecenity reading we did for today. The cases we read focused mainly on the issue of protecting children from pornography and the cases seemed to be left at a point where online pornography was okay, as long as people were taking "enough" precaution to prevent minors from acessing it. However, this doesn't really seem to make sense anymore with the increased development of online "tube sights" that have no regulation whatsoever and that are made up primarily of stolen or pirated material.
Obscene material is one that is not protected by the first amendment, but it is hard to believe that online porn is this accessible when there seems to be such a resistence to it. Another thing to consider though is how mainstream these online sights are becoming and how much money can be or is being made from these kinds of sights. I'm surpised that there has not been more recent cases regarding censoring of these kinds of sights (and maybe there are) and how the courts will rule on them.
It is indeed rather astounding how easily online porn can be accessed. Many of the free sights only have a waiver on the first page where you have to click on a button that says you are 18 or older (not that I know this from experience) and there is no possible way for them to determine if you are lying, or actually of age. It is also astounding how easy it is to find one of these sites, if you have access to the internet and a Google toolbar, you are ready to go. It will be interesting to see if there is more regulation in this industry in the near future in the form of pay-only sites or ID verification.
ReplyDelete