 
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
 ·Comcast
| Admirable thought... But who holds the liability here?
The wireless providers that are increasingly pushing web extensive phones.... or the pieces of sh*t that are producing it.
It will be the providers that are sued, but it would be nice to see the offenders get some kind of punishment.....like maybe the death penalty!
--
"There is no such thing as public opinion. There is only published opinion."....Winston Churchill
| |
|  | seropith
Rou
Premium
join:2002-11-12
El Paso, TX
clubs: 
 ·Embarq Now Century..
| Re: Admirable thought... The offender is responsible for his or her own actions. The provider holds liability if they can reasonably do something to prevent the crime on their service, but fail to do so. The keyword for the provider is "reasonably".
Technical measure are reasonable.
Employees to physical monitor every web transaction would not be reasonable and not very easily done.
Just as an example. | |
| | | ross
join:2000-08-16
·Digizip
| Re: Admirable thought... said by seropith  :The offender is responsible for his or her own actions. The provider holds liability if they can reasonably do something to prevent the crime on their service, but fail to do so. The keyword for the provider is "reasonably". Technical measure are reasonable. Employees to physical monitor every web transaction would not be reasonable and not very easily done. Just as an example. Cell phone and wireless providers, have NO such liability for content flowing across their networks. Inspection of any content is an invasion of privacy, let alone wholesale filtering of all content. Moreover, any filtering/inspection would open them up to liability where they currently have none.
The quickest and easiest way to identify and eliminate abhorrent social practices is to have a free and open society with policies against, and criminal sanctions for, practices universally deemed damaging and unacceptable. Violators may be more easily detected and investigated with regard to their activities/communications if their communications are not prohibited and driven underground.
The use of warrants for "wiretaps" would be the best focus for law enforcement, and protective of the privacy rights of the law abiding citizen. | |
| | | | seropith
Rou
Premium
join:2002-11-12
El Paso, TX
clubs:
·Embarq Now Century..
| Re: Admirable thought... You really should do your research before you post.
Lets look at case trend on libel -
Take New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254; where the courts ruled, had NYT known the information was false, they would have been liable. And thats just libel, so we see the trend on case law for service providers and publishers.
Now, for the related subject of k-porn, lets look at the USC.
For k-porn 42 USC 13032 requires services providers to report, should they have knowledge. If they do not report and they have knowledge, they are liable. Although they do not have to proactively monitor. | |
| | | | | ross
join:2000-08-16
·Digizip
| Re: Admirable thought... said by seropith :You really should do your research before you post. HUH!
said by seropith :Lets look at case trend on libel - Take New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254; where the courts ruled, had NYT known the information was false, they would have been liable. And thats just libel, so we see the trend on case law for service providers and publishers. WTF is this case about? Your statement has no discernible, and/or insufficient, context to have any relevance to the discussion.
said by seropith :Now, for the related subject of k-porn, lets look at the USC. For k-porn 42 USC 13032 requires services providers to report, should they have knowledge. If they do not report and they have knowledge, they are liable. Although they do not have to proactively monitor. You don't have the vaguest clue about what you're posting! Or, you simply have difficulty with reading comprehension. You confirmed every point I made:
Service providers have no liability for content passing over their networks, UNLESS they undertake to intercept, inspect, or censor. THEN, they would have a BIG problem; they would become liable for all content, discovered by them or not. Yes, if they become aware of illegal activity and fail to take action, they are liable. However, ignorance is bliss when it comes to interfering with the flow of communications in a relatively free society. | |
| | | | | | seropith
Rou
Premium
join:2002-11-12
El Paso, TX
clubs:
·Embarq Now Century..
| Re: Admirable thought... I apologize for telling you to do research. That was incredibly offensive.
However,
I believe the data I posted on case trend should be applied in a general sense. The specific second part of my post related to the topic at hand in a specific sense. If the providers are aware there is an issue, applying technical solutions is proper. | |
| RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| And let's not forget... ...the kids who send "questionable" pictures of each other via cell phone cameras, which later show up on the web.
This is akin to herding kittens. Fun to discuss but there is no actual way to control it. That's why you'll only see convictions for possession of child pornography since the producers are almost impossible to identify.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
| | 
AlsknSnoBals
join:2007-05-17
Anchorage, AK
 ·magicjack.com
| Re: And let's not forget... Two things about kiddie porn from someone who has inside knowledge of this whole affair from a law enforcement standpoint.
First, the whole kiddie porn scare is nothing but that....convince everyone that their neighbor is a child molester so we can sit and watch their Internet, bug their phone, and create a surveillance society with huge federal grants that we can spend any way we choose. Second, the number one purveyors of "kiddie" porn are horny sixteen year olds who are screwing over the Internet while their mother and father sit in the front room and plot to blow up abortion clinics.
All these stories we hear are made to sound like they're happening every fifteen minutes everywhere. In truth, most of these stories (95/100) are trumped up, enhanced, or an outright lie to keep everyone scared so they're easy to control. Those who can't be controlled will simply be accused and no conviction is necessary. Only the ones who have money will fight back, the rest will do what they're told. | |
| | | 
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: And let's not forget... said by AlsknSnoBals :the whole kiddie porn scare is nothing but that....convince everyone that their neighbor is a child molester so we can sit and watch their Internet, bug their phone, and create a surveillance society...... Second, the number one purveyors of "kiddie" porn are horny sixteen year olds who are screwing over the Internet while their mother and father sit in the front room and plot to blow up abortion clinics. Let's recap that for our audience. You maintain that hundredfold increase of k-porn is a due to a non-existent, scare mongered cause.
You then follow that up by informing us that the actual cause of the causeless volume of k-porn is a sizable number of 16 year old k-porn creators.
Oh, and by the way, there's an equally huge number of parents actively plotting to blow up abortion clinics.
The abridged version: Huge increase in k-porn, but no actual k-porn-ers putting it out there.
and
Huge numbers of parents getting ready to bomb abortion clinics, but no abortion clinics getting bombed.
So that's it then?
NV
--
Abortion: A Republican Plot to Thin the Liberal Herd. | |
| | | |
AlsknSnoBals
join:2007-05-17
Anchorage, AK
·magicjack.com
| Re: And let's not forget... Go ahead and believe what you want. When your turn comes (or your teenage son's turn, whichever the case may be), you'll see that the old addage is true. Experience truly is the best teacher. I went into law enforcement with good intentions. Like many people, I wanted to end a lot of the sickness that preys off of not just society, but families. What I found was an organization devoted not to justice, but scaring people for more money. Virtually every case that involves kiddie porn is trumped. If the government does not (and this is from the inside) have the evidence, they can create it because they know that very few people have $100,000+ to spend on a full blown investigation, trial, and appeals.
It's a money scheme and an exaggerated case that supports a whole cottage industry of cops, psychologists, lawyers, judges, and bondsmen while destroying more lives than it saves. Nobody says that there aren't sick people, but the numbers based on actual case by case evidence tells us that sick people do not account for nearly as many as KP Inc. leads us to believe. If parents would make better use of their responsibility over what their teenage children do and make them do homework instead of cybersex with their Internet squeeze, most of that stuff would disappear overnight. | |
| | | RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Very well said. | |
| | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
1 edit | Let's not forget Myspace and facebook where kids regularly webcam "friends" or send provocative pictures around. Hence, you run into loads of legal questions.
1) Do you sue the web site because the kids lied and said they were 18 to join (I say no).
2) Do you blame the parents (I say yes and no. It's their job to know what their kid does, but you can't know everything either. Plus many parents fear computers and their kids know more than they do).
3) What do you do when kids send images of a sexual nature around? Obviously no one coerced them if its between two individuals of the same age. Hence, you now have an "Illegal" image but such image was created willingly. Therefore, it's not like you can go arrest the kid for doing it.
As a result, my opinion is the only way to solve some of this problem is education. Kids need to learn internet safety and to know what they send online will exist indefinitely. When they are 50, that picture they took at 14 will still be around in one shape or form. Most of them don't realize this fact. Consequently, stuff they did as a kid can turn around and haunt them in their adult and professional lives. Simply put, most kids don't understand or think this far ahead and the need to be taught to do just that. | |
| | | |
AlsknSnoBals
join:2007-05-17
Anchorage, AK
·magicjack.com
| Re: And let's not forget... It's really a very simple case. Most parents in America are like Kyle's mom on Southpark. It's not their kids' fault that they're screaming little heathens who cause problems for society at large. It's our fault for living and giving them the opportunity to cause problems in the first place. Besides, their son or daughter is a good Christian kid who would "never do anything like that."
Fewer people would have problems and the government could pass fewer laws if more parents got spanked for shirking their responsibility as the adult. I can't count the number of times I heard a kid with the filthiest mouth I ever heard (and that's quite a few) after they got caught doing something wrong. When we released them to their parents, the parent was many times just as bad or worse and would swear we were "out to get their kid." Nevermind the fact the kid jacked some grandma out of her car at gunpoint. It's not their fault. It's grandma's fault for driving down the street.
The total lack of responsibility is why the government is passing more and more laws. Parents need to step back up and tell the psychologists to shut up and start disciplining their kids again. I'm a firm believer in spanking a kid, but when the parent is equally as corrupt thanks to modern psychology, the kid never stands a chance. It would be fine, except we are the ones that always have to pay for their problems because it's simply "not their fault." | |
| | | | | 
RainWind
join:2000-10-20
Van Wert, OH
| Re: And let's not forget... Speaking of a lack of personal responsibility, here's a fun one for ya.
My fiance's sister just bought a new van. 10 minutes after buying it a 17 year old with no license and no insurance driving his parent's car and doing stupid shit in the snow in a parking lot hits her head on. Her brand new van is now worthless because its been in a head on collision.
I'm sure anyone who has wrecked a car knows that its never quite the same after its been repaired, and nobody will give you near what it's worth. Hell, when they carfax it and see the head-on collision they won't even consider buying it.
The police won't do anything. The mother said her 17 year old son stole the car. She obviously has no plans to punish him, and he didn't actually steal the car, but that was good enough for the police so there's no charges... nothing. The kid just gets to hit her van head on and walk off without even getting a slap on the wrist.
They told her that her only option is to sue them in civil court. So she has to pay out of pocket for a lawyer to sue someone... and the kid doesn't even get punished...
Let's not forget its a van with 4 children all under the age of 6 inside it. We're definitely teaching children personally respobility aren't we. It O.K. to run head first into a family vehicle.. nobody will punish you for it.
I have absolutely no faith in the police, and very little faith left in humanity. | |
| | Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| they claim its for the kids but really its network management and packet shaping in sheep's clothing. if they make it hard to do anything multimedia on the phone but say its in the name of stopping kiddie porn nobody will say anything against it.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| | | | | | 
Uzi Suzy
@ameritech.net
| Re: Where is all this... said by Sabre :In Maryland we just had a state delegate resign after child porn allegations. Said delegate had recently sponsored a child protection bill. So making an allegation is now considered the same as a) building an actual case and b) proving that case?
I hope not. Because I think you'll find that making an allegation about someone is not all that hard. Particularly if the "someone" in question is a political opponent of some kind.
If you read the article, no charges of any kind have been filed. Which means that no one has proven anything yet. | |
| | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: Where is all this... Didn't you know, you guilty until proven innocent. The new American standard. The minute one throws an allegation at you, its OBVIOUSLY true, whether or not it holds merit. I hope I helped clarify your misunderstanding Uzi on this whole matter so you don't make the same assumptions in the future. (sarcasm). | |
| | | 
MrMoody
Why is this guy smiling?
Premium
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC
·Embarq Now Century..
·Skype
·magicjack.com
| Re: Broad Censorship? said by MxxCon :Is it me or is 'child porn' just an acceptable cover for them to implement content filters and 'walled gardens'? Why are consumers think this is good and are accepting this? 1. Find hot button. Terrorism and child protection work great.
2. Push it.
3. Get what you want.
--
The public is a poor business manager. | |
|
MotherOfTwo
@rogers.com
| Rights Of Children or Rights of Adults capable of Protecting It's good that wireless providers are taking action.
Since Child Porn doesn't exist unless a child is being abused, then even one child being sexually abused is enough to take action, unless you are saying sexual child abuse should be what abusers want it to be, hidden, kept secret and allowed as long as no adult becomes aware, and adults help by saying not my problem, I'll look the other way. Doesn't that condone the abuse of children?
I'm all for losing my rights, as long as children rights are upheld, and he since paedophiles would like their right to abuse be upheld, then I definitely do not want to be part of that category. | |
| | 
fuziwuzi
Not born yesterday
Premium
join:2005-07-01
Atlanta, GA
| Re: Rights Of Children or Rights of Adults capable of Protecting said by MotherOfTwo :
I'm all for losing my rights, as long as children rights are upheld, Then move to another country where the US Constitution isn't enforced. *MY* rights are not negotiable, for you or your kids. Statements like yours make me sick, you don't deserve rights. You only make yourself and your kids LESS safe in the long run. UGH! Do the world a favor and do not vote and do not have any more children! | |
|
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
·RoadRunner Cable
| Increasing Denial of K-Porn is Important to Some. I wonder why?
Anyway, here are the Porn Stats from the Internet Watch Foundation.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_W···undation
2004 - 3,433 known child abuse domains;
2006 - 10,656 known child abuse domains.
In 2006, Gnutella had 116,000 daily k-porn requests.
I really don't want to post the under 12 victim stats.
In 2003, our society reaps the results of a 15x increase in k-porn from 1988, is getting 20k new k-porn images/day, making 1 in 5 porn images k-porn.
In 2005 k-porn is moving $3Bil/yr around.
And btw, The Wall Street Journal. May 12, 2005 reported that worldwide revenue from mobile phone pornography is expected to rise to $1 billion and could grow to three times that number or more within a few years.
And on and on it goes.
So boys and girls, is the next porn defense tactic to (with no evidence) allege that the above numbers are exaggerated, therefore k-porn doesn't exist at all? Gonna have to work for that one. The IWF is pretty well credentialized.
I know a woman who is employed by a national law enforcement agency. She spends 6-9 months/yr overseas going after the perpetrators. Much of that is spent time trying to persuade government officials that doing the right thing is better than the lucrative bribes they receive.
But what am I going on about? This is Porn after all, what harm can it cause?
NV
--
Abortion: A Republican Plot to Thin the Liberal Herd. | |
| |
RainWind
join:2000-10-20
Van Wert, OH
| Re: Increasing Denial of K-Porn is Important to Some. Just because we're more aware doesn't mean its increased any.
Sexual abuse against children has always been around. People just never spoke up that much. Look at all the people coming out about sexual abuse by the catholic church. Just because more people are reporting their abuse now doesn't mean its actually increased. It just means we're more aware.
Our ability to track things, especially on the internet, has greatly increased. In your 2004/2006 stats the word "known" is pretty important. Just because we didn't know about it doesn't mean it wasn't happening.
The real issue is abused children. The suppliers. It doesn't matter how many people leech images off the internet. They aren't the ones hurting the children. The people creating the content are the ones causing the abuse, not the leechers.
There doesn't seem to be a lot done to protect the children. Every time I hear about someone downloading images and then being arrested I just feel saddened. All they've done is waste time and man power to catch a person who probably never harmed a child, and they act like its some sort of victory. Sure, they've arrested a pervert, but he's the very last type of person they should have been after. Where are the arrests for the creators of the content? I couldn't care less how many voyeurs they catch. I'm only interested in the people who harm the children. Looking at a photograph sheds no blood.
And where's the whole 20,000 NEW images a day stat coming from? That seems pretty high for this kind of content. | |
| | | | |
|
|
Wireless Operators Battle Child Pornography
·
Where is all this...
