Industry fights anti-porn law

This Wired News article makes me despair that business will ever redeem itself. Being self-employed, I am of course pro-free enterprise. But I find it disgusting that so many "enterprises" want to be free of social responsibility, as does the detestable and self-serving ACLU.

Salon.com, Nerve.com and other plaintiffs backed by the American Civil Liberties Union are suing over the 1998 Child Online Protection Act. They believe the law could restrict legitimate material they publish online -- exposing them to fines or even jail time.

Of course. Their commercial interests are more important than the well-being of children, especially if they can be exploited. These "good corporate citizens" wouldn't exactly come out and admit that, but if penalties were removed then they would be free to do just that, wouldn't they? And if they position themselves, rather than the children, as victims they just may have a shot at winning their case.

The Justice Department argues that it is easier to stop online pornography at the source than to keep children from viewing it.

Nice to see that someone has some sense, and isn't afraid to say so. But it would be nicer yet if their actions showed that they really meant it.

The law, signed by then-President Clinton, requires adults to use some sort of access code, or perhaps a credit-card number, to view material that may be considered 'harmful to children.' It would impose a $50,000 fine and six-month prison term on commercial Web site operators that publish such content, which is to be defined by 'contemporary community standards.'

It has yet to be enforced, however...