Free-speech advocates reacted with caution Tuesday to an announcement from Prodigy that the online service will limit access to Internet newsgroups deemed likely to contain child pornography, possession of which is illegal in the United States.
"Prodigy, of course, is a private company and has a right to restrict access," said Ann Beeson, staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union. "However, there are very serious policy questions about what is going to happen to content on the Internet. It's a very complicated issue."
She noted that even though the Supreme Court has upheld the First Amendment rights of online publishers, the industry appears to be moving toward a position of self-censorship in hopes of avoiding future legal battles with government authorities. Beeson said the ACLU is troubled by the possibility that new browsers from Microsoft and Netscape will include default filtering settings and that online services will limit access to parts of the Net.
But Prodigy says the issue of child pornography is one without much nuance: Kiddie porn is illegal, period, and the service will do what it can to black out newsgroups that promise it.
"This is not an issue of freedom of speech," insisted Prodigy vice president Marc Jacobson. "Prodigy has long been a leader in protecting the free-speech rights of Americans, and was one of the leading companies to challenge the 1996 Communications Decency Act.... We strongly support the Clinton administration's suggestion that the Internet industry regulate itself. We encourage other Internet service providers that haven't done so already to cease carrying these newsgroups."
Prodigy spokesman Mike Darcy said the company's decision affects only "a few dozen" newsgroups. He reiterated Jacobson's position that the First Amendment plays no part in any discussion of child porn.
"Child pornography is not protected by free speech," he said. "Child pornography is illegal under all circumstances."
The ACLU's Beeson agreed that US laws against possession of child pornography are very clear, and that the nature of online services' technological infrastructure requires them to store images on their servers prior to members being able to access the material.
"Certainly the ISP, at some point in the chain of distribution, does possess the image at some time," she observed. "That's illegal."
America Online also restricts access to such content, and other services are expected to follow suit. The idea is to head off any future efforts by virtue-defending members of Congress to claim that the Internet requires stricter oversight. "We do not want more government regulation," Darcy said.
