It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Internet service providers (ISPs) always seem to get the first call when a problem arises on the internet.
Lawmakers want them to assist with investigations into cyber crime, parents want them to filter out harmful content, consumers want them to stop spam, and copyright holders want them to curtail infringement.......and............
Adopting this approach has required strict adherence to a cardinal rule often referred to as "network neutrality." This principle holds that ISPs transport bits of data without discrimination, preference, or regard for content.
The network neutrality principle has served ISPs, internet firms and internet users well. It has enabled ISPs to plausibly argue that they function much like common carriers and therefore should be exempt from liability for the content that passes through their systems.
Emphasis added by MrPenny
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
The challenge of supporting free expression is the ability to defend that which you abhor.
If some students wished to wear a T-shirt proclaiming "gay pride," would that cause a disruption on campus? Would that be a controversial message? Would some students be offended? Yes, yes and yes. But they still should be allowed to wear them because it is merely a statement of their beliefs.
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
If today, racist opinion websites are held responsible for their content, what will tomorrow bring?
Will ATS be responsible for content that potentially encourages resistance to governments?
Will ATS be responsible for rhetoric that calls for the destruction of "enemy" nations?
Will ATS be prosecuted for sedition?
Certainly, on AboveTopSecret.com, racist hate-filled rhetoric is not allowed. But this isn't through any law or legislation, it's simply because of the standards that have been established as part of the management of this privately owned online community.
However, there are those who would certainly view the vast majority of our content to be promoting anti-government opinion and sedition.
If operators of racist websites are targets today, will websites with harsh government criticism and scandal speculation be the targets of tomorrow?
from subz
Freedom of speech is, sorry for the pun, only being given lip-service in the United States. Does anyone believe that the US government/people have any qualms about shutting US run terrorist websites down? How about sites with bomb making instructions?
Originally posted by jsobecky
I would hope that our gov't is doing everything in it's power to shut down terrorist websites. You may want to protect them, but I do not.
that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.