The legislation aims to “create another brick in the wall
against on-line sex offenders,” according to the New South Wales
Attorney General. However, it has also faced criticism for being
too invasive and challenging the principles of democracy.
The most questionable aspect of the law is how it will be
policed. Peter Coroneos of Australia’s Internet Industry
Association commented that a balance needs to be reached in
protecting children from material meant to be viewed by adults and
between criminalising the personal preferences of consenting
adults.
In a similar vein on the other side of the world, the US Supreme
Court is to hear arguments over a 1999 law that requires web site
operators to shield children from viewing “harmful” material
on-line. The US Child On-line Protection Act (COPA) has faced
opposition from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and
others. COPA was passed by Congress after an older law, the
Communications Decency Act (CDA), was ruled unconstitutional by the
Supreme Court.
Although lawmakers have included some language in COPA designed
to make it narrower than the CDA, opponents argue that these
changes are merely cosmetic. The CDA has in fact been described as
“the closest equivalent” to the New South Wales legislation by
Irene Graham, executive director of Electronic Frontiers
Australia.
In the US, COPA is to be debated by the Justice Department and
the American Civil Liberties Union next week. COPA describes
material that is “harmful to minors” as content that could
adversely affect children though it does not need to reach an
illegal level of obscenity.
