Filtering

[Steve]

x-no-archive: yes


Judge Rules Against Filters at Library

Pamela Mendels
NY Times 11/24/98


In a major decision supporting unfettered access to the Internet in
public libraries, a federal judge on Monday struck down the policy
of the Loudoun County, Va., library system to use filtering software
on all computer terminals. 

"Such a policy offends the guarantee of free speech in the First
Amendment and is, therefore, unconstitutional," Judge Leonie M.
Brinkema, of the United States district court for the Eastern
District of Virginia in Alexandria, said in a 46-page decision
issued late Monday. 

Brinkema wrote that the use of filters, made by a private company
and sold to the library, also constituted a form of prior restraint
on distribution of speech, and asserted that "a defendant cannot
avoid its constitutional obligation by contracting out its decision
making to a private entity." 

Brinkema issued a permanent injunction that will block the filtering
policy. Library officials can appeal the decision to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in Richmond. 

The ruling comes at a time when librarians nationwide are grappling
with whether to allow patrons restricted Internet access or full
access, meaning users would be able to view sexually graphic
material not ordinarily available on library bookshelves. Today about
15 percent of libraries have installed filters on at least some of
their terminals, according to a recent survey from the American
Library Association. 

The decision leaves unanswered whether it would be constitutionally
acceptable to use filters on terminals that are set aside for
children. 

The lawsuit challenging the library policy was brought late last
year by a civic organization called Mainstream Loudoun as well as a
handful of individual patrons. Later, publishers of eight Web sites,
from a safe sex page to an online publication examining ethical
issues, joined the suit, saying their speech had been censored by
the policy. All eight sites had been blocked at one point by the
filtering software, called X-Stop, but were unblocked after the suit
was filed, according to Ann Beeson, a lawyer for the American Civil
Liberties Union, which represented the publishers. 

Lawrence S. Ottinger, senior staff lawyer for the People for the
American Way Foundation, which helped bring the suit on behalf of
the Loudoun patrons, hailed the decision. "I think it's a landmark
victory for public libraries and the right of the public to read
what they want in public libraries," he said. 

Ken Bass, a lawyer defending the library, had just begun reading the
decision late Monday. He asked to withhold comment until he had
finished. 

The library had argued, among other things, that the filters were
necessary to keep obscene material that is not protected by the
First Amendment out of the library. Supporters of the filters also
said that if pornographic images could be shown on terminals, this
display could create a hostile working environment for library
employees, violating sexual harassment laws. 

But opponents said that the filters are so flawed that they block
access not only to sexual material, but to legitimate material as
well. At one point, they said, X-Stop had blocked Web sites put up
by such groups as the Quakers and the American Association of
University Women. 

David W. Burt, founder of the pro-filtering organization Filtering
Facts, said that he believed courts would eventually look upon
filtering as constitutionally acceptable. However, he added, "In the
short-term, the decision will scare a lot of librarians -- and city
attorneys -- off from filtering for adults." 

Copyright 1998 The New York Times Company 





* * * * * * * * * * * * * *  From the Listowner  * * * * * * * * * * * *
.	To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
majordomo at scn.org		In the body of the message, type:
unsubscribe scn
==== Messages posted on this list are also available on the web at: ====
* * * * * * *     http://www.scn.org/volunteers/scn-l/     * * * * * * *