Feds Seek Google Records in Porn Probe - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-19-2006, 02:34 PM   #1
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2Girl1978's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: At the altar of the dark star
Posts: 19,374
Local Time: 05:05 AM
Feds Seek Google Records in Porn Probe

SAN JOSE, Calif. - The Bush administration, seeking to revive an online pornography law struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court, has subpoenaed Google Inc. for details on what its users have been looking for through its popular search engine.

Google has refused to comply with the subpoena, issued last year, for a broad range of material from its databases, including a request for 1 million random Web addresses and records of all Google searches from any one-week period, lawyers for the U.S. Justice Department said in papers filed Wednesday in federal court in San Jose.

Privacy advocates have been increasingly scrutinizing Google's practices as the company expands its offerings to include e-mail, driving directions, photo-sharing, instant messaging and Web journals.

Although Google pledges to protect personal information, the company's privacy policy says it complies with legal and government requests. Google also has no stated guidelines on how long it keeps data, leading critics to warn that retention is potentially forever given cheap storage costs.

The government contends it needs the data to determine how often pornography shows up in online searches as part of an effort to revive an Internet child protection law that was struck down two years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court on free-speech grounds.

The 1998 Child Online Protection Act would have required adults to use access codes or other ways of registering before they could see objectionable material online, and it would have punished violators with fines up to $50,000 or jail time. The high court ruled that technology such as filtering software may better protect children.

The matter is now before a federal court in Pennsylvania, and the government wants the Google data to help argue that the law is more effective than software in protecting children from porn.

The Mountain View-based company told The San Jose Mercury News that it opposes releasing the information because it would violate the privacy rights of its users and would reveal company trade secrets.

Nicole Wong, an associate general counsel for Google, said the company will fight the government's efforts "vigorously."

"Google is not a party to this lawsuit, and the demand for the information is overreaching," Wong said.
__________________

__________________
U2Girl1978 is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 07:52 PM   #2
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:05 AM
The thing with porn should be to have it well regulated with consistently applied and clearly defined regulations and international co-operation among law enforcement to combat abuses.

The planned legal changes sound sensible enough to me.
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 07:56 PM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 04:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy
The planned legal changes sound sensible enough to me.
Not when you're dealing with a conservatives that have broad interpretations of obscenity. That's why they've run into trouble. Curbing adult expressions of speech due to a vague reason of "protecting the children" is unconstitutional, as courts have ruled repeatedly.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 08:05 PM   #4
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 05:05 AM
I don't get why parents can't just watch their own damned children.

You don't want your kids looking at porn, they you make sure they don't. But don't take away someone else's rights because you don't want to bother being a parent.
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 08:20 PM   #5
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
Not when you're dealing with a conservatives that have broad interpretations of obscenity. That's why they've run into trouble. Curbing adult expressions of speech due to a vague reason of "protecting the children" is unconstitutional, as courts have ruled repeatedly.

Melon
Point taken, but the reality of the porn industry is that it's worth billions per year, so Republicans, if they're wearing their sound business heads, presumably don't want to totally shut it down.

Think of the increase in the unemployment stats in a certain region of California.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 08:23 PM   #6
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:05 PM
It is not about protecting children, it is about putting the noose in place to restrict an "immoral and corrupting" industry.

User pays pornography combines sex and the free market, guess which one are they against?

Stopping children from viewing pornography is different from stopping child pornography.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 08:40 PM   #7
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Stopping children from viewing pornography is different from stopping child pornography.
Yes but given the wide availability of the internet it is reasonable to have measures that make it more difficult for children to view pornography. Exposure to pornography at a young age could induce a degraded view of sexuality.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 08:49 PM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 05:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy


Yes but given the wide availability of the internet it is reasonable to have measures that make it more difficult for children to view pornography. Exposure to pornography at a young age could induce a degraded view of sexuality.
Then the kids' parents should be paying attention and not using the internet to babysit their kids.
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 08:50 PM   #9
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:05 PM
Any evidence for that other than anecdotal, have incidences of rape dramatically increased in countries where children have had access to the internet over the last decade? Do studies on attitudes towards sexuality show a detrimental effect since the advent of the internet?

A national system of age verification would be setting the stage for internet use to be checked on a database, it could very easily be augmented for abuse.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 08:58 PM   #10
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by indra
Then the kids' parents should be paying attention and not using the internet to babysit their kids.
You really think that it's as simple as that? A 13 year old adolescent male, if he wants to find porn, will easily outwit his parents, not least because he probably knows a lot more about computers than they do.

I don't have kids but when and if I do I wouldn't want them looking at porn, at least until they're 16 or 17. And I don't want to be worrying over the fact that they might be because internet porn is not sufficiently regulated.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 09:06 PM   #11
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
VertigoGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: I'm never alone (I'm alone all the time)
Posts: 9,860
Local Time: 04:05 AM
Porn should be available to adults who want it, but I have to say that it's all over the place. I mean I didn't really need to see multiple pages of naked women in sexual and/or degrading poses when I was 11 years old. I wouldn't want my kids to see that at that age in the future. And pretty much all teenage guys look at porn starting pretty young, no matter what their parents think they are doing to stop it, trust me.
__________________
VertigoGal is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 09:10 PM   #12
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:05 PM
Regulation just would not work. If you lock browsers out of the box and force people to plug their "national ID card" number into google everytime they wanted porn then kids would just use p2p networks, or direct connect or go to a LAN and fileshare with their gigabit ethernet.

Having personal browsing of material checked on by the state is more frightening from an individual liberty perspective than the wiretaps of intercepted incoming AQ suspect phone calls.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 09:17 PM   #13
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
VertigoGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: I'm never alone (I'm alone all the time)
Posts: 9,860
Local Time: 04:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Regulation just would not work. If you lock browsers out of the box and force people to plug their "national ID card" number into google everytime they wanted porn then kids would just use p2p networks, or direct connect or go to a LAN and fileshare with their gigabit ethernet.

Having personal browsing of material checked on by the state is more frightening from an individual liberty perspective than the wiretaps of intercepted incoming AQ suspect phone calls.
I could be wrong but I think the US gov't can look at pretty much anything they want on the internet including emails and things...I couldn't back it up, but someone told me that they even have computers that filter through emails that have suspicious words or combinations of words, etc.

And regulation wouldn't stop the determined from finding porn, but it might help...sort of
__________________
VertigoGal is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 09:20 PM   #14
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:05 PM
I saw a few calculations, it would be mathematically impossible for an echelon system to function over all the internet, and thats ignoring the legal implications.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 01-19-2006, 09:22 PM   #15
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 10:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Any evidence for that other than anecdotal, have incidences of rape dramatically increased in countries where children have had access to the internet over the last decade? Do studies on attitudes towards sexuality show a detrimental effect since the advent of the internet?
I have the same question.

financeguy is right, though, about the ultimate unfeasibility of regulating what teenagers (boys especially?) will seek out, online or otherwise. And that's really the age group most of us parents are concerned about. I already know what my 7 year old's current phase of response to catching a glimpse of a naked female image is: he collapses into embarrassed giggles. Big deal. My real concern is, as he gets older and less embarrassed and more keenly interested (as he should, it's normal and healthy), might he be tempted to fall into a kind of compulsive reliance on the stuff as an (unhealthy) alternative to struggling through the alternately painful, confusing, humiliating and exhilarating struggle of slowly learning to integrate his sexuality with the other aspects of his social self, just like we all did as teenagers? That's my worry really, not that he'll become a rapist or a misogynist or whatever.

But like A_W, I just haven't seen the sociological or psychological data to clarify for me one way or the other whether access, in and of itself, makes these fears more likely to come true.
__________________

__________________
yolland is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com