Introduction
According to Masnick (2011), the advent of torrenting that took place in 2004 has left an uptick in media and software piracy. The institute of Policy Innovation (IPI) provides that, more than $58 billion of revenue is lost each year due to piracy (Masnick, 2011). In this regard, it is now clear that something should be done to fight this illegal activity since the measures that are currently implemented have been rendered ineffective. However, many people continue to be concerned that the proposed cure is likely to be a side effect and something that will be worse than the “disease” itself.
The proposed solution to combat piracy and other unauthorized activities on the internet is internet censorship. However, there has been a significant debate on the issue of internet censorship since it was brought to light. Masnick (2011) has proposed that, even after advanced development of the internet, internet censorship debate continues to loom in the US. In March, the US internet community had finally won when major websites came together with internet freedom supporters and managed to overrule the controversial internet antipiracy bills (Masnick, 2011).
The two bills, which are Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and PROTECT IP Act, were put in place as a way of preventing real online threats to economic activities and theft of Intellectual Property Act 2011. These two bills were passed by the US government to help the Department of Justice as well as the copyright holders to shut down all websites that violated intellectual property or were used to sell counterfeit goods (Masnick, 2011). With many people protesting against the two bills, which are largely associated with internet censorship, it is in order to examine the existing dialog on internet censorship. To this end, this paper discusses the concept of internet censorship, how it has been debated and implemented in the US, and how it can be resolved.
Overview of the Research
The usage of the internet has increased in the past ten years, reaching about 1.5 billion users. With the speedy evolution of the internet, internet censorship has become a topic of debate. This has caused internet users to be divided into those who are advocating for internet censorship and those who are totally opposing it. With a critical evaluation of internet censorship debate, it is possible to understand the legislations as well as resolutions that can be used to determine whether this censorship will be beneficial for the society as a whole. Through a discussion of the reasons used to argue for or against internet censorship, it is possible to have an understanding of the censorship concept in general. It also allows for the formation of opinions on the issue of internet censorship. The aim of this paper is to critically evaluate internet censorship debate.
Definition of Internet Censorship
Internet censorship occurs when access to the internet is being limited as a way of preventing people from accessing certain information from online channels (Arab IP Centre, 2012). To some degree, internet censorship is carried out in all countries. For instance, all countries are likely to restrict access to child pornography websites. However, there are some countries, which have implemented internet censorship to an extent that it becomes an issue.
Also, as far as the definition of internet censorship is concerned, it is not only the government that participates in internet censorship. For instance, an organization may decide to limit employee’s movements over the internet. In such a case, the organization will implement a mechanism, which will screen all websites visited by employees or all the emails that employees receive or send to the outside world. However, internet censorship debate is looked upon in terms of a national issue since most of the acts passed on by the US government in the form of antipiracy bill are geared towards protecting economic activities and intellectual property on a national level.
While many people are against internet censorship, not everybody is against this concept. In fact, it is possible to find that many people advocate for internet censorship. However, in order to understand this concept, it is essential to distinguish between advocates and critics of internet censorship.
Advocates for Censorship
As indicated by several studies, advocates for internet censorship are mainly large organizations and governments. As McCarthy (2005) asserts, Congress has enacted a number of measures, which are required to protect children from exposure to harmful materials over the internet since 1996. The argument for internet censorship is not a new thing. Since 1990, Congress has exhibited serious concerns about minors being exposed to materials that are harmful over the internet (McCarthy, 2005).
While the internet offers many opportunities, it also acts as a threat to the well being of the society. Information is made accessible for both positive and negative effects. For instance, the internet provides information using cheaper and easily accessible mechanisms, which means more and more people, are able to access information at lower costs and at their conveniences. However, not all information available on the internet is clean. In fact, in the 21st century, most illegal activities, including pornography, have moved from manual access to the internet.
According to Masnick (2011), President Obama has voiced his support for the internet censorship bill. According to President Obama, the internet is not a safe place to be. He makes reference to what happened to America in September 11 and provides that the internet is currently a channel through which terrorist manage their operations (Masnick, 2011). Indeed, President Obama is correct considering the fact that the internet provides easier access to all networks. Communication between different people can be performed unnoticed, thus making it difficult to pinpoint the exact location of a person. Also, considering that IP addresses currently changes, it is difficult to know who is conversing with whom.
Another reason for censorong the internet is the growing illegal downloading activities, which have been made possible with the advent of torrents. The economic value of many countries and companies are declining since people are getting what they need without paying for it. For instance, the music, movies and software industries are seriously being hurt by illegal internet downloading. It is therefore proper to say that internet censorship can help to mitigate illegal activities over the internet.
Arguments against Censorship
While internet censorship seems to provide mechanisms that will help to stabilize the economy as well as save society from unethical activities that are performed over the internet, its consequences are far greater than its benefits. A speech provided by Mike Masnick (2011) provides that a number of companies in the US are currently advocating for internet censorship not because it is a good thing, but because these companies are lazy to compete in the open market.
While the US president is strongly advocating for internet censorship, he is forgetting the fact that this activity is going to hurt free speech, hurt many jobs and at the same time break people’s connectivity to the internet (McCarthy, 2005). Arguably, these are tactics that are required when one wants to implement a totalitarian government, which is believed by many people to be undesiarabe. According to Ameer et al (2011), subjecting people to internet censorship, as it has been done in some countries, is like subjecting people’s lives to unwanted surveillance.
Additionally, Landier (1997) voiced his concerns about internet censorship providing that internet censorship is unconstitutional and absurd. The internet should not be censored due to a number of reasons. The first reason, according to Landier (1997), is that laws that advocate for internet censorship are too broad and not enforced in the current global information medium. The other reason provided by Landier (1997) is that censorship of the internet is a breach of the First Amendment rights for the internet users that reside in the US.
Internet Censorship Implemented in the US
In the US, internet censorship is currently being debated on. Despite that, there are still some bills which are implemented in order to protect the society from unauthorized internet activities. Ameer et al (2011) provides that a number of laws limiting people from using the internet in the US have been in effect since 1990. Some of these laws are discussed in this section.
Communication Decency Act (CDA)
Ameer et al (2011) provides that Communication Decency Act (CDA) is one of the early laws that was concerned with internet activities, and, therefore used to limit access to minors to any materials that are defined as harmful over the internet. Although it was not enforced, CDA was the first real attempt the US Congress used to get involved with the censoring of pornographic or materials that were poised to be obscene over the internet (McCarthy, 2005). This Law was provided as Title V of the compilation bill, which was termed as the Telecommunication Act of 1996.
This Law was first introduced to the Senate by James Exon. The aim of devising this law was to inhibit pornography profusion as well as other obscene materials. Despite that, this law has been criticized by many people to infringe people’s privacy as far as the internet is concerned. For instance, the law the law made it a point to sue bloggers for the content found on their sites, thus diminishing freedom of speech.
Child Online Protection Act (COPA)
According to Ameer et al (2011) COPA is the other law that was introduced early in the US government. The idea of introducing this law was to restrict minors from accessing harmful materials through online channels. The term “child” as used in this law refers to a person less than 13 years. This law states that any online operator is not allowed to provide online services that are directed to children. Additionally, this prohibits operators from collecting personal information from children in a manner that is regarded as violation of regulations that have been prescribed under its subsection.
In case an operator is caught offending this law, it is stated that he will be liable under any State or Federal law. The consequence of this law is that operators cannot tell the exact stature of the people viewing their websites. In that case, it is proper to ascertain that this law limits activities of operators regarding on factors that are hard to ascertain. According to several sources, this law has been overturned as it was struck down as unconstitutional (McCarthy, 2005). This is law requires users of websites to verify their age.
Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA)
Being another one of the laws regarding how the internet should be used by children, CIPA was introduced into law in 2000. Under this law, no school or library should receive discounts unless the school or library certifies that is has enforced policies on how internet is being used, and includes several filters or technologies for blocking internet sources (McCarthy, 2005). CIPA was introduced to protect against access with computers that have internet access, visual depictions, which are regarded as obscene, child pornography and any other content that is regarded harmful to children.
According to this law, all the schools and libraries that are receiving only telecommunications services need to be excluded from CIPA’s requirements. According to Ameer et al (2011), CIPA managed to achieve, in part, what could not be achieved by the previous two acts. This act forced all public schools as well as libraries to implement technologies to filter their internet, which was stated as one of the conditions required for both schools and libraries to receive Federal E-Rate funding (Ameer et al, 2011).
Internet Censorship Resolved
Many people who are debating against internet censorship need to come up with ways that can be used in place of the laws that have been enforced to censor the internet. There are two alternatives which are now widely employed to protect children from harmful materials from the internet. These are described below.
Parental responsibility
As provided in the Coalition’s Discussion Paper (2012), the internet has immense potential to educate children, enhance the economy as well as benefit the society, and, therefore, it should be left unregulated. The Coalition’s Discussion Paper (2012) also ascertains that, this freedom, anonymity and innovation have enabled insidious, illegal and malicious activities, which are against children. Materials that are dangerous and harmful cannot be directed towards children because of freedom of speech.
However, the US constitution need not implement heavy regulations towards the use of the internet, but other means can be used to protect children from accessing harmful materials from online channels. Therefore, since parents have direct access to their children, it is their responsibility to ensure that they are not exposed to harmful materials online. This requires frequent checks on activities that children are undertaking on their computers as well as frequent monitoring. In addition to that, parents can install software like firewall that allows them to block any content that can be harmful to children.
Private alternatives
An alternative to internet censorship will be for private companies to regulate the use of internet. For instance, various websites need to be blocked while firewall can be used to restrict access to some internet contents. Websites that include pornographic, gambling and other materials that are considered unproductive can be blocked and denied access to using as well structured firewall software. Additionally, private website companies need to clearly state the consequences of a minor accessing their content, if it is not intended for their eyes.
Currently, there are many websites that ask for age before one is allowed access into their pages. However, this is not enough since people can always lie about their age. It is time for internet providers to come up with better ways of identifying users of their websites. This can include a certain identification number, which is only issued to people over a certain age.
Conclusion
In this paper, the focus has been on internet censorship, internet censorship debate, how it has been implemented and its resolution. Internet censorship is the restriction of rights to access internet information. Also a description of some internet censorship laws including CIPA, COPA and CDA has been provided. Most importantly, it is important to note that not everybody is against internet censorship. In fact, key figures in the US are arguing for internet censorship, which they claim is necessary to protect their intellectual property and other information. Some of the reasons why majority of people are against internet censorship is because it denies people their freedom of speech as well as other aspects that are provided by the internet.
References
(2012). The Coalition Discussion Paperon Enhancing Online Safety for Children. ISBN.
Ameer, A., Boscher, N., Diop, W., Hadlich, S., & Manz, D. (2011). The political economy of internet censorship: A cross-country perspective. Retrieved from http://www.simoncolumbus.com/wp-content/2011/04/PYW-Ameer-Boscher-Diop-Hadlich-Manz-Political-Economy-of-Internet-Censorship.pdf
Arab IP Centre. (2012). What is internet censorship and how does it work technically? Retrieved from Arab IP Centre:
Landier, M. (1997, 6 4). Internet Censorship is Absurd and Unconstitutional. Retrieved from Landier : http://www.landier.com/michael/essays/censorship/
Masnick, M. (2011, 1 18). The Companies Who Support Censoring The Internet. Retrieved from Techdirt: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110118/12431012712/companies-who-support-censoring-internet.shtml
McCarthy, M. (2005). The continuing saga of internet censorship: the child online protection act. Brigham Young University Education & Law Journal, (2), 83-101.
