Quote:
Originally Posted by crucifissio
95% of all parents do not know how to activate a "filter" nor do they know that there is such a filter. This is a strong argument. Look at my alexa.com stats for porn tubes, its obvious that many minors are on tubes. This is also a strong argument and easy to prove.
Keeping the above in mind, a politician with interests could easily argue that the filters don't work...
|
I am just going off of what the supreme court ruled which is that there is/was adequete filtering out there for those who wanted to us it. That some parents choose not to look into it is not the governments fault. It is not the government's job to raise people's kids. Anyone with 10 minutes and a reasonable IQ can find out about filters.
Traffic and size of the site doesn't matter when it comes to filters. They all get blocked.
The size of the site could and likely will bring about new laws. I agree with you completely that there will likely be some kind of new anti-porn laws passed in the future, but just because it passes doesn't mean it will survive the legal challenges. I don't think a person could go before the supreme court and say, "Pornhub as 10 million visitors a day therefore it is clear filtering doesn't work," All the defense would have to do is show them a computer with a filter enabled that blocked pornhub and the case would be closed.
Quote:
|
How would this break their rights? The fact that they can't get it for free? I don't understand what this has to do with the first ammendment or what ever...just curious...
|
The idea is twofold. First, not everyone has a credit card so those without one could be denied access to something that has been ruled as being legal and protected by the constitution. Second, they ruled that credit cards are only used in commercial transactions so even if you are just verifying it, it will cost you something and it could put a financial burden on sites. Here is the wording from the actual ruling on that:
"Credit card verification is only feasible, however, either in connection with a commercial transaction in which the card is used, or by payment to a verification agency. Using credit card possession as a surrogate for proof of age would impose costs on non-commercial Web sites that would require many of them to shut down. For that reason, at the time of the trial, credit card verification was "effectively unavailable to a substantial number of Internet content providers."
You could add to that the fact that many minors have credit cards. I had my first credit card when I was 17 years old. These days when you open up a bank account of any kind your ATM card is a debit card that acts like a credit card so tons of kids have them.