Should access to sexually explicit material online be regulated?

Feb. 3, 1999 -- A federal judge authorized a preliminary injunction against a law designed to regulate online access to pornography by minors Tuesday, re-igniting a debate that has pitted civil liberties and anti-censorship advocates against those in favor of protecting children from sexually explicit material found online. In his decision to block the Child Online Protection Act, known as "CDA II," from taking effect, Judge Lowell A. Reed Jr. expressed concern about the scope of the legislation and its impact on free-speech rights. Reed concluded that COPA's age-verification restrictions on pornographic content were also potentially harmful to the ability of Web sites attempting to attract new audiences and build user bases.

COPA, which passed the 105th Congress as H.R. 3783, is an attempt to rework the Communications Decency Act of 1996 that was found unconstitutional that same year by the U.S. Supreme Court in ACLU vs. Reno. Unlike the CDA, the new law, which is often referred to as "CDA-II" because it also regulates online decency, would apply only to commercial Web sites. COPA requires commercial Web sites to collect a credit-card number or some other adult access code as proof of age before allowing Internet users to view material considered harmful to minors. Violators would face penalties of up to six months in jail and a $50,000 fine.

Civil liberties and anti-censorship activists hailed Reed's decision as a "significant victory" in the protracted fight against attempts to curb Internet speech. In November, Reed placed a temporary restraining order on the implementation of COPA until Feb. 1. Members of an anti-COPA coalition led by the ACLU have repeatedly expressed opposition to vaguely worded clauses of the online-smut bill and have expressed concern over the ramifications that such restrictions might have on the civil liberties of adult users.

Supporters say the law is a common-sense way to keep Internet pornography away from children. Supporters of the legislation have argued that COPA specifically targets commercial pornographers and is not meant to be applied to other Web sites that do not feature sexually explicit material. Reps. Michael Oxley, R-Ohio, and James Greenwood, R-Pa., cosponsors of the House legislation, have continued to pledge support for COPA and argue that state laws restricting minor access to pornography have already succeeded without encroaching on freedoms of adults.

This Policy.com Daily Briefing focuses on the debate over the legality of regulating access to sexually explicit material by minors.

Internet Regulation: Undue Restrictions on Free Speech, E-commerce	COPA Protects Minors from Explicit Material Online