AJ+Crosby

Guiding Research Question: Should your employer or an internet service provider control what you post on the internet?



** Evolution of The Internet: First Amendment Rights? **

** By: AJ Crosby **

I chose to do my research paper on First Amendment rights and how they pertain to the internet, mainly because of how sensitive censorship online is becoming. Censorship is evolving into a growing issue particularly in the United States due to the increasing access to the world wide web thanks to technological advances allowing us to use more devices from more places to browse the internet. I personally do not agree with restricting the rights of American citizens online especially when on social networking sites such as facebook and twitter. So, the question I asked myself when researching this topic is; should anyone, specifically your employer, control what you post on the internet?
 * Reasons for censoring: || Reasons for not censoring: ||
 * * Allows writers to write about sensitive topics without causing any problems || * Restrict rights of U.S. citizens ||
 * * Enables employers to control what is put on the internet || * Why post if you can't write what you want? ||
 * * Protecting minors agains obscene material. || * Can't get your point across the way you would like ||

** Court Cases: **

National Economic Research Associates Inc. et al. v. David Evans:

This particular court case took place in October of 1994 and was unique because an unknown user posted statements on a bulletin board indicating that a company, Stratton Oakmont, Inc which is a long island security brokerage firm and its president had committed criminal and fraudulent acts in connection with the initial public offering of Solomon-Page, Ltd. Because the information was anonymously posted on the bulletin the plaintiffs argued that the owner of the bulletin should be punished because, according to the law, the owner of the bulletin is just as responsible for what people post on his bulletin. A decision was never made because they settled before the motion was decided.

Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union:

This court case took place in 1997 to determine the constitutionality of two statutory provisions enacted to protect minors from indecent and patently offensive communications on the internet. This case was brought to the supreme court with a goal of protecting children from harmful materials even though the statute abridges the freedom of speech protected by the first amendment. The internet is becoming more available to minors and that individuals can obtain access to the internet from many different sources, general hosts, themselves, or entities with a host affiliation.

The City of Ontario, Calif., v. Quon:

The supreme court ruled in favor of the state of California in an effort to set a standard for all court cases alike so that others courts may have something to base their ruling off of. In this court case the state issued swat officers pagers to be use for work related issues only.The state of California pays for a certain number of text to be sent from each pager a month, every text that is sent after the maximum allowed text per month are charged an additional fee. After one pager showed having sent over 456 text in one month, the head of the department decided to investigate and found that over half of the text sent from the officers pager were niether work related and contained sexually explicit messages. The officers who were investigated decided to press charges against the department for going against thier First Amendment rights given to them by constitution. The court decided that the department had every right to search the pagers simply because they told the officers they were subject to be searched, they belonged to the department, and they determined the cause for searching the text messages were in enough reason to disregard their First Amendment rights.

**What I Think:**

I think that no one should have the right to control what you put on the internet unless or send using mobil devices. i feel as though everyones opinion is of value in some way unless it is intended to harm someone or goes against boundaries set against postings on the internet.

** Works Cited **

"American Civil Liberties Union." American Civil Liberties Union. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Nov. 2012. .

"Important Court Cases Dealing with Internet and Censorship." Important Court Cases Dealing with Internet and Censorship. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Nov. 2012. .

"Internet Censorship and the Freedom of Speech." Internet Censorship and the Freedom of Speech. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Nov. 2012. .

"Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 117 S.Ct. 2329, 138 L.Ed.2d 874 (1997)." Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 117 S.Ct. 2329, 138 L.Ed.2d 874 (1997). N.p., 19 Mar. 1997. Web. 28 Nov. 2012. .

"Stratton Oakmont v. Prodigy." Home. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Nov. 2012. .