4 ms·

Here is the full text of the proposed bill: http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess122_2017-2018/bills/3003.htm http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess122_2017-2018/bills/300

Here is the full text of the proposed bill: http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess122_2017-2018/bills/3003.htm http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess122_2017-2018/bills/3003.htm

sailfast 10y ago
Reading the article was upsetting. Reading the actual law being proposed, however, is even worse. Gobsmacked. I am not sure how any lawmaker or attorney viewing this bill would be able to press ahead with this. "What about the first amendment?" "Oh, nevermind that - they can pay to remove the filter." "...?! I guess Freedom isn't free after all, but I didn't think that's what that meant. Are you going to manage the filter?" "No, the companies will manage it - it won't cost us a thing to block the traffic of the whole state. People will just do it for us, you know, because we tell them so." "...?" > COMPANY MUST: "make reasonable and ongoing efforts to ensure that the digital content blocking capability functions properly, including establishing a reporting mechanism such as a website or call center to allow for a consumer to report unblocked obscene content or report blocked content that is not obscene" This is far more than the $20 cost it purports to be.
- jaclaz 10y ago
  >... such as a website or call center to allow for a consumer to report unblocked obscene content or report blocked content that is not obscene... How would the customer be able to ever get to know that a (non-obscene) blocked site actually exists? I mean short of using a no-filter-installed device i.e. paying 20 bucks anyway.
- Beltiras 10y ago
  Phone Center! Imagine that. "Yes, the URL reads: doubleu-doubleu-doubleu dot ......."
TheGrumpyBrit 10y ago
OK, let's do this. "A business, manufacturer, wholesaler, or individual that manufactures, distributes, or sells a product that makes content accessible on the Internet is prohibited from doing business in this State unless the product contains an active and operating digital blocking capability that renders any obscenity, as defined in Section 16-15-305, inaccessible. The business, manufacturer, wholesaler, or individual must: (1) make reasonable and ongoing efforts to ensure that the digital content blocking capability functions properly, including establishing a reporting mechanism such as a website or call center to allow for a consumer to report unblocked obscene content or report blocked content that is not obscene; (2) ensure that all child pornography and revenge pornography is inaccessible on the product; (3) prohibit the product from accessing any hub that facilitates prostitution; and (4) render websites that are known to facilitate any trafficking of persons, as defined in Section 16-3-2010(9), inaccessible." What is "a product that makes content accessible on the internet"? A computer? A router? A telephone line? Or does the computer simply access things which are already accessible, in which case we're talking about webservers and the like? Since this applies to an individual too, does this mean you can't sell your old computer unless you set up a method for people to report things they shouldn't see on there? Leaving aside the practical fact that it's impossible to do, given that it is (presumably) illegal to access child pornography, how is somebody supposed to "ensure that all of it is inaccessible" without breaking the law? How would one report blocked content that isn't obscene? How can you know it's not obscene if you can't access it? I can't face reading the rest of it. The first paragraph is already making my brain hurt.
- coldcode 10y ago
  Regulating interstate commerce is outside the purview of a State anyway. Since the internet and the manufacturers are external to the State and its boundaries, this law is nothing more than a political statement. First federal judge that sees this bill will laugh it out of court.
pavel_lishin 10y ago
> (2) ensure that all child pornography and revenge pornography is inaccessible on the product; This is literally impossible, short of monkey-wrenching the operating system to prevent it from displaying images altogether. > (3) prohibit the product from accessing any hub that facilitates prostitution; and Where is a list of these hubs? Will each manufacturer have to keep their own list, or can I just call and ask Mr. Chumley for his personal one?

Here is the full text of the proposed bill: http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess122_2017-2018/bills/3003.htm http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess122_2017-2018/bills/3003.htm

sailfast 10y ago

Reading the article was upsetting. Reading the actual law being proposed, however, is even worse. Gobsmacked. I am not sure how any lawmaker or attorney viewing this bill would be able to press ahead with this. "What about the first amendment?" "Oh, nevermind that - they can pay to remove the filter." "...?! I guess Freedom isn't free after all, but I didn't think that's what that meant. Are you going to manage the filter?" "No, the companies will manage it - it won't cost us a thing to block the traffic of the whole state. People will just do it for us, you know, because we tell them so." "...?" > COMPANY MUST: "make reasonable and ongoing efforts to ensure that the digital content blocking capability functions properly, including establishing a reporting mechanism such as a website or call center to allow for a consumer to report unblocked obscene content or report blocked content that is not obscene" This is far more than the $20 cost it purports to be.

jaclaz 10y ago
>... such as a website or call center to allow for a consumer to report unblocked obscene content or report blocked content that is not obscene... How would the customer be able to ever get to know that a (non-obscene) blocked site actually exists? I mean short of using a no-filter-installed device i.e. paying 20 bucks anyway.
Beltiras 10y ago
Phone Center! Imagine that. "Yes, the URL reads: doubleu-doubleu-doubleu dot ......."

TheGrumpyBrit 10y ago

OK, let's do this. "A business, manufacturer, wholesaler, or individual that manufactures, distributes, or sells a product that makes content accessible on the Internet is prohibited from doing business in this State unless the product contains an active and operating digital blocking capability that renders any obscenity, as defined in Section 16-15-305, inaccessible. The business, manufacturer, wholesaler, or individual must: (1) make reasonable and ongoing efforts to ensure that the digital content blocking capability functions properly, including establishing a reporting mechanism such as a website or call center to allow for a consumer to report unblocked obscene content or report blocked content that is not obscene; (2) ensure that all child pornography and revenge pornography is inaccessible on the product; (3) prohibit the product from accessing any hub that facilitates prostitution; and (4) render websites that are known to facilitate any trafficking of persons, as defined in Section 16-3-2010(9), inaccessible." What is "a product that makes content accessible on the internet"? A computer? A router? A telephone line? Or does the computer simply access things which are already accessible, in which case we're talking about webservers and the like? Since this applies to an individual too, does this mean you can't sell your old computer unless you set up a method for people to report things they shouldn't see on there? Leaving aside the practical fact that it's impossible to do, given that it is (presumably) illegal to access child pornography, how is somebody supposed to "ensure that all of it is inaccessible" without breaking the law? How would one report blocked content that isn't obscene? How can you know it's not obscene if you can't access it? I can't face reading the rest of it. The first paragraph is already making my brain hurt.

coldcode 10y ago
Regulating interstate commerce is outside the purview of a State anyway. Since the internet and the manufacturers are external to the State and its boundaries, this law is nothing more than a political statement. First federal judge that sees this bill will laugh it out of court.

pavel_lishin 10y ago

> (2) ensure that all child pornography and revenge pornography is inaccessible on the product; This is literally impossible, short of monkey-wrenching the operating system to prevent it from displaying images altogether. > (3) prohibit the product from accessing any hub that facilitates prostitution; and Where is a list of these hubs? Will each manufacturer have to keep their own list, or can I just call and ask Mr. Chumley for his personal one?