WORLD Law Direct Forums
Home > WORLD Law Direct Forums > FORUM INFORMATION > Law News > Internet Law Not COPA-cetic, Third Circuit Rules

Internet Law Not COPA-cetic, Third Circuit Rules

This is a discussion on Internet Law Not COPA-cetic, Third Circuit Rules within the Law News forum, part of the FORUM INFORMATION category; The Third Circuit Court of Appeals struck social conservatives a blow this afternoon, agreeing with a lower court that shot ...

Consult Your Own Personal Lawyer Now!
Reply

 

Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old Jul 22nd, 2008, 08:40 PM   #1
News
 
WSJ_law_blog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,438

Default Internet Law Not COPA-cetic, Third Circuit Rules



The Third Circuit Court of Appeals struck social conservatives a blow this afternoon, agreeing with a lower court that shot down as unconstitutional COPA, or the Child Online Protection Act, a 1998 law intended to protect children from sexual material and other objectionable content on the Internet. Here’s the AP report, and here’s the opinion.

COPA provides for civil and criminal penalties — including up to six months imprisonment — for anyone who knowingly posts “material that is harmful to minors” on the Web “for commercial purposes.” The court notes:

“Material that’s harmful to minors” includes any communication that’s obscene or that: (A) the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find, taking the material as a whole and with respect to minors, is designed to appeal to, or is designed to pander to, the prurient interest; (B) depicts, describes, or represents, in a manner patently offensive with respect to minors, an actual or simulated sexual act or sexual contact, an actual or simulated normal or perverted sexual act, or a lewd exhibition of the genitals or post-pubescent female breast; and (C) taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.

In its ruling, the Third Circuit concluded that — dust off your Con Law books! — in addition to failing the strict scrutiny test because it’s not narrowly tailored, COPA does not employ the least restrictive alternative to advance the Government’s compelling interest in its purpose — to protect children from inappropriate content online.

Last edited by top_admin; Jul 22nd, 2008 at 10:39 PM.
WSJ_law_blog is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmark & Share



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

| More

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may 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

Format Your Messages
Add Forum to Google Toolbar
Forum Jump

Similar Threads

Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sixth Circuit Rules on Cincom v. Novelis--Copyright License in Mergers Unregistered Copyright, Trademark, Patent 1 Sep 25th, 2009 02:37 PM
McConnell to Leave Tenth Circuit, Join Stanford Law Faculty WSJ_law_blog Law News 0 May 5th, 2009 07:30 PM
Does Recent First Circuit Ruling Turn Libel Law on Its Head? WSJ_law_blog Law News 0 Mar 13th, 2009 08:20 AM
Second Circuit Rules on Customary International Law and ATS ILJ_Digest International Law News 0 Feb 19th, 2009 01:00 PM
Technology & the Law: 2nd Circuit OK’s Cablevision’s DVR System WSJ_law_blog Law News 0 Aug 4th, 2008 07:21 PM


International Law Issues?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:27 AM.