Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Wednesday April 26 2017, @12:07PM   Printer-friendly
from the a-marriage-is-formed-between-one-man-and-one-electronic-computing-device dept.

More than a dozen state legislatures are considering a bill called the "Human Trafficking Prevention Act," which has nothing to do with human trafficking and all to do with one man's crusade against pornography at the expense of free speech.

At its heart, the model bill would require device manufacturers to pre-install "obscenity" filters on devices like cell phones, tablets, and computers. Consumers would be forced to pony up $20 per device in order to surf the Internet without state censorship. The legislation is not only technologically unworkable, it violates the First Amendment and significantly burdens consumers and businesses.

Perhaps more shocking is the bill's provenance. The driving force behind the legislation is a man named Mark Sevier, who has been using the alias "Chris Severe" to contact legislators. According to the Daily Beast, Sevier is a disbarred attorney who has sued major tech companies, blaming them for his pornography addiction, and sued states for the right to marry his laptop. Reporters Ben Collins and Brandy Zadrozny uncovered a lengthy legal history for Sevier, including an open arrest warrant and stalking convictions, as well as evidence that Sevier misrepresented his own experience working with anti-trafficking non-profits.

The bill has been introduced in some form [in] Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, West Virginia, and Wyoming (list here). We recommend that any legislator who has to consider this bill read the Daily Beast's investigation.

[...] It’s unfortunate that the Human Trafficking Prevention Act has gained traction in so many states, but we're pleased to see that some, such as Wyoming and North Dakota, have already rejected it. Legislators should do the right thing: uphold the Constitution, protect consumers, and not use the problem of human trafficking as an excuse to promote this individual’s agenda against pornography.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/04/states-introduce-dubious-legislation-ransom-internet


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 26 2017, @06:45PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 26 2017, @06:45PM (#500263)

    Um... what? Robber Barons got to their position through Government's imposition; why would you expect them to behave in any way other than Governmental?

        Contrast the Robber Barons with, say, James J. Hill. [mises.org]

    Anyway, the history of civilization is clear: There is an increasing devolution of power from the God-on-Earth Pharaoh to the individual who may choose to exist under one set of contracts or another.

    Democracy is as far as government can go: It's still one group dictating to another group; as you yourself point out, it is fundamentally no different from a warlord. The next step in Civilization will be dropping the reverence for the warlord in favor of reverence for contracts (and therefore in favor of a true separation of powers: Competition within a market—heck, just consider the virtue of the fact that in our current times, there are multiple governments under which one may kind of "choose" to exist).

    If your system allows one particular organization in society to declare a 100-year-old pub to be "illegal", or to throw people into internment camps for having Japanese heritage, or to break into a person's home and shoot his dog and rough him up for growing a leafy plant in "privacy", then your system is not acceptable.