Mark Zakharov

Zakharov 1

Mr. Davis
Period 2
2 November 2015
Cyberspace, the final frontier, with little to explore and discover on our own
planet, humans have decided to create their own plane to explore. This is called the
internet, where users actively can upload, share, and save any information they have or
stumble across. The internet creates a worldwide web of interconnected users,
communication and the speedy relay of information has never been easier. With such an
expansive entity there are many opportunities for users to start their own business, upload
content to entertain others, or just for their own personal use. After two decades since the
internets creation, there are already people that are trying to impede its growth and
productivity. This is called internet censorship; there are people out there who are trying
to stop the relay of certain information on the internet which they deem unacceptable.
This bill is meant to stop such an occurrence from happening by banning the
unauthorized censorship of a users internet by the government, private corporations, and
internet service providers. The internet is considered free speech, so it is unconstitutional
to censor it, censorship will be harmful to the development of the internet, and many will
be hurt on a personal level- like those who make a living based on what they do online.
The internet is considered a form of speech, meaning it is protected by the
constitution, so censoring it anyway will be against the constitution. But there are those
who are trying to work around that and censor it anyway, such as private interest
organizations that feel they are losing money or the government because the internet is

Zakharov 2
almost completely privately run so they want more control over it. The First Amendment
protects the rights of the internet except for in cases of fighting words, libel, commercial
speech, and obscenity. (Qazi, Usman). Those that wish to censor the internet on grounds
of obscenity are rightfully entitled to their opinion, but when such an action comes into
affect, it can seriously cripple the access we have to the internet. Since it is a heavily
opinionated topic, there is no clear definition of obscenity and what should or shouldnt
be censored. In many cases there are outcries from concerned parents that are afraid that
their child may stumble onto something which they do not want them accessing.
Restrictions brought about are mainly there in order to protect children from obscenity,
but will end up applying to everyone in a nationwide internet censor. (Burns, Kate).
Once one service or provider decides to blacklist a site, it will be down for everyone in
their region that is using their internet services. They will have no say in this, and will be
denied access to information- once this happens, this whole point of the internet will be
defeated. Censorship will affect everyone, and once it starts it will escalate until the
government completely controls it like in China.
If we want to continue enjoying the lavish frivolities of the internet, we must
support it in its continuous growth so that is becomes more expansive. This guarantees
access to any information to anyone on the globe at anytime, both for the sake of
convenience and for pleasure. If censors are implemented then websites will become
blacklisted, not able to be accessed by the general public, and the web will be cut
down, surviving as a blotted out ghost of its former self. Many Americans are beginning
to rely on the internet as a main source of news, information, and entertainment (47 U.S.

Zakharov 3
Code.). The Us Code of Law defends the internet from censorship because of the damage
it may to the efficiency of the transfer of information and the development of the internet
should be actively promoted. Without it special interest groups would tackle it like a pack
of hungry wolves, and gnaw at it until nothing is felt and their hunger has been sated.
China, the worlds leading country in internet and free speech suppression and
censorship has in its constitution the statement: Citizens of the PRC have freedom of
speech, publication, assembly, association, procession and demonstration." (Communism
and Computer). Internet censorship is a slippery slope, once it begins to fall through the
cracks, and then everyone who wants a stake in it can partake. It will become an
acceptable practice and soon enough the internet will be a barren wasteland just like
Chinas, whose internet is also supposedly protected by their constitution.
Many previous bills such as SOPA and PIPA have popped up because of copyright
infringement claims, well these will be made stricter and punishments more severe if
internet censorship is allowed. Now anyone without written consent cannot use any or
share any intellectual property online, something that the internet thrives off of. Websites
that stream videos like YouTube will be taken down due to copyright claims, as well as
live streaming, pdf book sharing, and many other sites will be blocked because of tight
copyright laws. Vague standards set by bills like SOPA ignore due process of law and
censors completely lawful speech.( Ahrens, Julie). On top of blocking sites, a bill like
SOPA would have taken down any sites it suspected had copyright infringement due to
advertisements on the site by not allowing major companies or credit card providers to do
business with them. It could have censored any completely lawful speech it wanted on

Zakharov 4
the grounds that it had infringing content. A bill like this would have destroyed the whole
infrastructure of the internet, causing many people to lose their livelihood. There are
thousands of people who make a living solely off the internet, providers of online
services, media reviewers, journalists, video up loaders and creators would be completely
shut down by any internet censorship and claim of infringement. COPA, a bill meant to
impose criminal penalties on those who knowingly publish material that is harmful to
minors; this was ruled unconstitutional as it was against the First and Fifth Amendments.
(Lamut, Anna). Something classified as harmful to minors is so objective it is harmful,
anyone can claim something to be harmful to minors, and that accusation can topple an
entire company. Vague standards set by private interest groups are being kept at bay
because they can effectively ruin the internet as we know it, turning it from an open
source of public information, to a highly regulated highway which no one can access.
The stance one must take when protecting the idea of internet censorship is one of
morality and personal judgment. The most popular argument right now is copyright
infringement and before that it was protecting minors for certain content. The problem
with minors viewing explicit content should rest with the parents, not the whole internet
that affects people on a global scale. The values behind the First Amendment make the
costs that accompany free expression worth bearing, but where children are concerned,
the benefits are not as strong and the costs are greater. (Martha McCarthy). This quote
shows the reasoning behind adults claims as to why the internet should be censored, they
value control over what their children are exposed to over their rights. It no longer has to
Zakharov 5

be this way, as there are programs that can be installed called internet filters which put a
parental lock on content on a specific computer. These filters can be found online, free of
charge, and would not restrict internet use on a global scale. The next hot topic is
copyright infringement, a missile that has sunk many websites ships already. The claim
that is often made is that people are making money off of others intellectual property,
without written constant and are not giving the original creator any share of profits made.
Internet censorship has a nice spot for stricter copyright laws to sit in, where it can take
down any form of media it may consider to have infringing content. Many ISPs are
corporate entities with fixed places of business, whereas clients who post infringing
materials may be mobile or otherwise difficult to track down. The ISP is thus usually
much easier to find than the individual who posted the allegedly infringing material.
Second, the infringers are likely to be "judgment-proof" -- meaning that they lack the
financial resources to pay a substantial liability judgment. Therefore, copyright holders
commonly target ISPs because they almost always have more money than the individual
client who allegedly posted the copyright infringement. (Teran, G.). If these laws pass,
then whole ISPs can be taken down because they will take the blame, causing the
eventual downfall of the whole internet. All arguments made in favor of internet
censorship are purely opinionated for there is no good, logical reason to take down the
largest connecting platform of media, entertainment, and communication the world has
ever seen.
In order to enjoy the luxuries and convenience the internet provides for the whole
world, we must realize what large corporations and special interest groups are trying to
Zakharov 6

change when they mean to censor it. If they have any control over it, then they will
eventually come to have all control over it. By stopping them we can upkeep the growth
of the internet, a series of electronic waves that change the world, waves which brought
us into a new light of technological advancement and will continue to carry us forward.

Works Cited

Zakharov 7

-Ahrens, Julie. "Stop Censorship: The Problems With SOPA." Stop Censorship:
The Problems With SOPA. Stanford Law School, 16 Nov. 2011. Web. 23 Oct.
2015.
-McCarthy, Martha. "THE CONTINUING SAGA OF INTERNET
CENSORSHIP: THE CHILD ONLINE PROTECTION ACT." Byu.edu. N.p.,
2004. Web.
-"Communism and Computer Ethics." Communism: Censorship and Freedom of
Speech. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2015.
-"47 U.S. Code 230 - Protection for Private Blocking and Screening of
Offensive Material." LII / Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law
School, n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2015.
-Lamut, Anna. "ACLU v. Mukasey | JOLT Digest." JOLT Digest RSS. Harvard
Journal, 3 Aug. 2008. Web. 23 Oct. 2015.
-Qazi, Usman. "The Internet Censorship Controversy." The Internet Censorship
Controversy. N.p., 09 May 1996. Web. 22 Oct. 2015.
-Teran, G. "ISP Liability for Copyright Infringement." ISP Liability for Copyright
Infringement. N.p., 11 Feb. 1999. Web. 23 Oct. 2015.
-Burns, Kate. Censorship. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven, 2004. Print.