Jun 11 2008
4:40PM
EDT
Kiddie Porn and ISPs, What Took So Long?
Blaise Zerega thinks there oughtta be a law: So, Verizon, Sprint, and Time Warner Cable agreed to block access to child pornography sites and bulletin boards. While it's the right thing to do, two questions immediately come to mind. One, what took so long? And two, will it work?
Consider the 2002 investigative report, The Lolita Problem, on the role of Internet companies in so-called Lolita sites. The authors found "highly organized commerce--possibly illegal--involving credit card firms like Visa and MasterCard, Web communities like Yahoo Geocities and Eccentrix Dot Com, third-party credit card processors like iWest and BillCards, online advertisers like Chevron and Orbitz, and Web-hosting companies like Verio and UUNet, a subsidiary of WorldCom. Thanks to the Internet's capabilities for distribution and e-commerce transactions, this dirty business has brazenly exploded into an eerily efficient and highly profitable industry."
The authors also found that it would be relatively easy for tech companies to police themselves, quoting one executive, "Porn takes up a lot of bandwidth and child porn typically generates huge traffic spikes. Spotting these sites isn't that hard," he says. "It's simple economics. [Child porn] creates revenue, so hosting companies turn a blind eye."
The story pointed out that at least one hosting company, Rackspace, had taken an aggressive, zero-tolerance approach to the offensive material. And after the article's publication, VISA began implementing measures to prevent its cards from being used for these purposes. Law enforcement officials also consulted with the article's authors.
It's clear then that more than five years ago, there was the will, at least in some quarters, and the way for internet service providers to block this content. So, why did it take so long for Verizon, Sprint, and Time Warner Cable to take action? In my view, because providing access to child porn sites was profitable. And, the second question: Will these measures work? Probably not. The kiddie porn purveyors will likely devise ways to circumvent the restrictions. Still, they're better late than never, and better to be doing something -- instead of nothing -- about the problem.
Consider the 2002 investigative report, The Lolita Problem, on the role of Internet companies in so-called Lolita sites. The authors found "highly organized commerce--possibly illegal--involving credit card firms like Visa and MasterCard, Web communities like Yahoo Geocities and Eccentrix Dot Com, third-party credit card processors like iWest and BillCards, online advertisers like Chevron and Orbitz, and Web-hosting companies like Verio and UUNet, a subsidiary of WorldCom. Thanks to the Internet's capabilities for distribution and e-commerce transactions, this dirty business has brazenly exploded into an eerily efficient and highly profitable industry."
The authors also found that it would be relatively easy for tech companies to police themselves, quoting one executive, "Porn takes up a lot of bandwidth and child porn typically generates huge traffic spikes. Spotting these sites isn't that hard," he says. "It's simple economics. [Child porn] creates revenue, so hosting companies turn a blind eye."
The story pointed out that at least one hosting company, Rackspace, had taken an aggressive, zero-tolerance approach to the offensive material. And after the article's publication, VISA began implementing measures to prevent its cards from being used for these purposes. Law enforcement officials also consulted with the article's authors.
It's clear then that more than five years ago, there was the will, at least in some quarters, and the way for internet service providers to block this content. So, why did it take so long for Verizon, Sprint, and Time Warner Cable to take action? In my view, because providing access to child porn sites was profitable. And, the second question: Will these measures work? Probably not. The kiddie porn purveyors will likely devise ways to circumvent the restrictions. Still, they're better late than never, and better to be doing something -- instead of nothing -- about the problem.
Recent Blog Posts
- First Bytes: Muxtape, Apple, Palm
- Aug 20 2008 8:32AM EDT
- Did Muxtape Lie About RIAA Pressure?
- Aug 19 2008 9:33PM EDT
- Last Bytes: H.P., Apple, MIT Gag Order
- Aug 19 2008 6:40PM EDT
- Warner's Griffin Still Pushing ISP Music Fee
- Aug 19 2008 6:07PM EDT
- From IBM: All Cars Hybrid By 2020?
- Aug 19 2008 5:27PM EDT
- Google Love-Fest Goes On
- Aug 19 2008 4:38PM EDT
- Energy Crisis? Google To The Rescue!
- Aug 19 2008 3:49PM EDT
- $20 Billion for 100 Ad Companies....
- Aug 19 2008 3:40PM EDT
- Update: RIAA Says Muxtape Hosting "Illegal Content"
- Aug 19 2008 2:23PM EDT
- Did The RIAA Just Kill Muxtape?
- Aug 19 2008 9:59AM EDT
- First Bytes: Muxtape, iPhone, Google, more...
- Aug 19 2008 8:35AM EDT
- Last Bytes: EA/Take-Two, GPhone, "White Spaces," Apple Fire
- Aug 18 2008 6:47PM EDT
- Google: "Wi-Fi 2.0" Plan Would Benefit Public -- and Our Bottom Line
- Aug 18 2008 5:30PM EDT
- Cellphone Showdown: In this Corner, the GPhone
- Aug 18 2008 4:38PM EDT
- Pandora: Requiem For Internet Radio?
- Aug 18 2008 3:27PM EDT
Categories
Links
- Mark Cuban's blog

- TechCrunch

- GigaOM

- Engadget

- USA TODAY Tech

- Romenesko

- BuzzTracker Tech

- Roger McGuinn's Folk Den

- Maney's band on MySpace

- Spiedies, mmmm

- Somewhat Frank's tech conference list

- Tom Foremski

- Fred Wilson

- Pandora

- SciTech Daily

- Todd Bishop's Microsoft Blog

- Steven Johnson

- The Long Tail

- paidContent

- John Battelle's SearchBlog

- Marc Andreessen

- Kevin's site

- Kevin Maney & His Briefs on CD Baby










