overviewfrequently asked questionscases & resources
  FAQs >
 
What’s the First Amendment issue with legislation against cyberstalking?
 
Why should ‘virtual’ child pornography be thought of any differently than child pornography?
 
What about using images from other Web sites on my own site?
 
Can I use a company's logo for a parody Web site?
 
Has Congress stepped in to change the laws regarding copyright and the Internet?
 
What are 'gripe sites' or 'cybergripers'?
 
Why is the concept of 'local community standards' difficult to apply to the Internet?
 
Do 'gripe sites' violate federal trademark laws?
 
What is the Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1996?
 
I got kicked off AOL for cursing in several messages. Doesn’t that violate my free speech?
 
What is the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act of 1999 and does it prohibit gripe sites?
 
Are there laws prohibiting spam?
 
Does using filters to block parts of the Internet violate the First Amendment?
 
Internet filters give librarians control in order to protect children from harmful material. What’s the objection?
 
Can public schools use Internet filters to block students' access to specific Web sites?
 
Could the president sue me if I posted a message critical of him?
 
Can’t patrons ask librarians to override filters when mistakes are made?
 
Aren't ISPs required to conceal their clients' identities?
 
Who is affected by the U.S. v. ALA ruling?
 
How much influence do private companies have over access?
 
Some states have laws against SLAPPs. Do they apply to online libel lawsuits?
 
Would filtering the Internet at public colleges and universities violate the First Amendment?
 
 

Unfortunately the answer to this is unclear. So far only one state — Virginia — has passed a law allowing public colleges and universities to filter the Internet.

In 1996, Virginia passed a law that “restricts access by state employees to lascivious sexually explicit material on computers owned or leased by the state.”

Access to such material may be allowed if it is part of an “agency approved research project” and permission is granted by a supervisor. The law was challenged by six state university professors on grounds that the law unconstitutionally interfered with their research and teaching.

The case was heard by the full 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which in an 8-4 decision, held the statute to be constitutional. The court had to determine if the statute regulated speech made by public employees, in their role as private citizen, on matters of public concern. The critical determination, according to the court, “is whether the speech is made primarily in the [employee’s] role as citizen or primarily in his role as employee.” The court found in its 2000 ruling in Urofsky v. Gilmore, that the speech at issue — “access to certain materials using computers owned or leased by the state for the purpose of carrying out employment duties” — was clearly made in the employee’s role as employee. Therefore the statute “does not affect speech by [the professors] in their capacity as private citizens on matters of public concern” and thus “does not infringe the First Amendment rights of state employees.”

The professors in Urofsky had also argued that the statute was unconstitutional because it infringed on their First Amendment right to academic freedom. The 4th Circuit judges rejected this argument, saying that their review of the law lead them to conclude that the right to academic freedom was held by the university and not the individual.

 
 
After U.S. v. ALA, are there any other legal options?
 
What is a blog?
 
Does blogging raise First Amendment issues?
 
Can public employees be disciplined for the content of their blogs?
 
What would be wrong with banning all child pornography, virtual or real?
 
Has Congress ever tried to prohibit hate speech on the Internet?
 
View All Answers    Clear All Answers
 
print this   Print


Last system update: Saturday, November 21, 2009 | 07:09:53
 SEARCH  MORE
Internet & First Amendment issues >
Filtering
Indecency online
Spam
Cybersquatting
Online libel
Hate speech online
Virtual child pornography
Copyright, P2P & Google
Cyberstalking
Blogging