Skip to main content /WORLD
CNN.com /WORLD
CNN TV
EDITIONS




Survey shows more Asians surf the Net for porn

Survey shows more Asians surf the Net for porn


SINGAPORE (Reuters) -- Asian Internet users flocked to pornographic Web sites in March, with Singaporean executives and South Korean students topping the list, a four-country report by NetValue shows.

Some 10.7 million South Koreans headed to adult sites in March, a hefty 72 percent jump from the year before, the Internet measurement firm said in a statement on Thursday.

Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore all saw a 30-40 percent jump in the number of visitors to the sites. In Taiwan, 2.5 million unique users clicked on porn sites, with 715,700 in Hong Kong and 373,100 in Singapore.

Given Singapore's "strict law of enforcement against all sorts of vices, the Internet offers a convenient source to other unorthodox materials," NetValue sales director Alan Choo said.

Asians also spent more time at porn sites.

Surfers in Taiwan were glued to adult material on their screens for an average of 90 minutes in March, Hong Kongers spent 73 minutes, Singaporeans 66 minutes, while Koreans were captivated for just half an hour.

Students across the four countries were also spending more time on porn and downloading more Web pages, NetValue said.

"Perhaps parents should be more observant of what their children are doing online," Choo said in the statement.

Students made up almost half of all Korean Internet users who visited porn sites, while about 47 percent in Singapore were executives and professionals.

Copyright 2002 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



 
 
 
 







RELATED SITES:

 Search   

Back to the top
WorldCom blocks access to child porn - Tech News - CNET.com
CNET tech sites: Price comparisons | Product reviews | Tech news | Downloads | Site map
Front PageEnterpriseE-BusinessCommunicationsMediaPersonal TechnologyInvestor


WorldCom blocks access to child porn

By Lisa M. Bowman and Declan McCullagh
Staff Writers, CNET News.com
September 23, 2002, 12:46 PM PT

Bowing to an order from Pennsylvania's attorney general, WorldCom will block customer access to some offshore Web sites by the end of the day.

Last week, a Pennsylvania judge, at the request of Attorney General Mike Fisher, ordered WorldCom, the bankrupt Internet and voice provider, to block access to five purported child pornography sites. Among those was a site hosted by Terra.es, Spain's largest Internet portal and a division of Terra Lycos.

Because it doesn't have the technical capability to stop residents of a particular state from viewing specific Web sites, WorldCom plans to block all of its North American subscribers from some of the IP (Internet Protocol) addresses. Other sites were taken down over the weekend, including the pages hosted by Terra Lycos. As a result, WorldCom won't have to block North American access to all Terra.es sites.

"While WorldCom abhors child pornography and has long worked with law enforcement, we have concerns about the breadth of this decision," WorldCom spokeswoman Sudie Nolan said.

The case stems from a Pennsylvania law enacted earlier this year that says an ISP (Internet service provider) must block child porn sites "accessible through its service in a manner accessible to persons located within this commonwealth within five business days" after being notified by the attorney general.

If a company does not block such a site after being notified, it can be convicted of a misdemeanor and, after repeat violations, a felony.

A representative for the Pennsylvania Attorney General's office said the state has worked out cooperative agreements with many ISPs but that WorldCom balked at its latest request.

WorldCom, however, said it was only complying with a legal procedure that requires law enforcement to get a court order before blocking access.

Usually, law enforcement works with the ISPs that host the disputed sites, but in this case, investigators decided to go after a company that allowed people to reach them. WorldCom did not host any of the sites.

WorldCom's action does not mean that all of the sites are no longer available on the Web--only that the company's customers can't view them. That potentially could affect millions of Internet users because WorldCom carried about 30 percent of U.S. Internet traffic last year.

No other state appears to have enacted such a sweeping law, and it has not been tested in court.

WorldCom had considered challenging the order but acquiesced in part because some of the alleged illegal pornography had been removed over the weekend, a source close to the company said Monday.

If WorldCom had chosen to challenge the order, it could have raised First Amendment arguments, saying that a ban on Terra.es was overly broad and violated American's rights to access legitimate content.

Crossing state lines
The case also raises questions about jurisdictional issues on the Web, or the extent to which one region can apply its laws to the Internet. A law such as Pennsylvania's allows the state to "sort of project its laws beyond its borders," Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Lee Tien said.

This isn't the first time that Internet providers have fretted about being sued--or have been prosecuted for criminal violations.

Internet service providers got a first serious wake-up call on the issue nearly a decade ago, when the Church of Scientology sued then-prominent ISP Netcom for providing access to copyrighted Scientology documents. The suit was filed in 1995, before any of the ISP "safe harbors" laws had been passed, and Netcom ultimately settled. The incident helped spark many of the political discussions that came later.

ISPs lobbied to ensure that the 1996 Telecommunications Act said they would not be "treated as the publisher or speaker" of sexually explicit material that their subscribers distribute. In 1998, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act said ISPs "shall not be liable" for copyright violations as long as they act quickly to limit infringements when notified.

ISPs got a bad scare in 1999, when the House voted on the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act, which didn't receive the two-thirds majority necessary under a special voting procedure used for that bill. The proposal, backed by Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., would have required Internet providers to "disable access" to offshore gambling sites after being contacted by police.



Print story E-mail story Order reprints Send us news tips


 Search
 
   

Latest Headlines
display on desktop
Microsoft changes Xbox configuration
Lab to sample Linux for weapons work
Palm's loss narrower than expected
ICANN nears approval of .org successor
HP's new world
$50 million from HP, Microsoft for .Net
Peregrine sues Andersen
Warnings, war worries batter markets
Microsoft server share jumps in 2001
HP cuts price on DVD-rewritable drives
Amazon seeks patent for payment system
WorldCom blocks access to child porn
Release set for "sharper" digicam chip
Have you helped a spammer today?
Microsoft, HP to team for .Net effort
Palm debuts new business software
Former Adelphia executives indicted
Europe approves Big Blue's PwC buy
Sprint loses wireless customers
Philip Morris aims to inhale trademark abusers
This week's headlines

News Tools
Get news by PDA
Get news by mobile
Listen live to CNET Radio

CNET newsletters

News.com Daily Dispatch

News.context (weekly)

Investor Daily Dispatch

Week in Review





All newsletters | FAQ
Manage my newsletters



Send us news tips | Contact Us | Corrections | Privacy Policy

   Featured services: CNET SearchBar | Hosting Providers | IT Resources | Back to School Guide | Tech Jobs   
  CNET Networks: Builder.com | CNET | GameSpot | mySimon | TechRepublic | ZDNet About CNET  

Copyright ©1995-2002 CNET Networks, Inc.All rights reserved. CNET Jobs
Hearings End in Online Pornography Case

banner
toolbar
Lexis-Nexis: It's All You Need to Know
January 28, 1999

Hearings End in Online Pornography Case

By PAMELA MENDELSBio
PHILADELPHIA -- A federal online pornography law will either unconstitutionally chill free speech on a variety of commercial Web sites or spur the creation of sensible screens between children and sites that exist to sell pornography.

Those were the opposing views expressed Wednesday during the final day of hearings in United States District Court here to decide whether the new law, the Child Online Protection Act, should be blocked by a preliminary injunction.



Related Articles
U.S. Argues Case on Online Smut Law
January 27, 1999

Witness Describes Easy Access to Porn
January 26, 1999

Government Defends Net Pornography Law
(January 23, 1999)

Web Publishers Testify Against Anti-Porn Law
(January 22, 1999)

Internet Smut Law Enters Court, With a Snag
(January 20, 1999)


Judge Lowell A. Reed Jr. had asked both sides to be prepared to respond to a list of 19 questions he had regarding the case. And in their answers, lawyers continued to try to build their cases for or against the law.

Ann Beeson, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, which is fighting the law, said that the statute would require free Web sites containing certain sexually explicit material either to eliminate that content or risk driving viewers away through registration or age-verification mechanisms. Therefore, she said, the law "creates a very strong financial disincentive to create or publish work," adding that there is "a risk of a chilling effect on free speech."

But Justice Department lawyers, defending the law, argued that its language is clear enough to apply only to sites that exist to promote pornography. Furthermore, said one of the lawyers, Rupa Bhattacharyya, "The First Amendment allows you to speak freely; it does not necessarily guarantee you a profit to speak."

The law requires operators of commercial Web sites to bar those under 17 years of age from any sexually explicit material defined as "harmful to minors." Violators face penalties of up to 6 months in prison and $50,000 in fines.

Judge Reed is expected to issue a decision sometime Monday before the midnight expiration of a temporary restraining order that has blocked the law from being enforced. The law was signed last October by President Clinton, but it has never gone into effect.

In response to one of the judge's questions, Christopher A. Hansen, another lawyer for the ACLU, which is challenging the law with 16 other groups and businesses, indicated that the statute's wording could put at risk all kinds of businesses not engaged in selling pornography. The Justice Department has said that only sites that produce material "harmful to minors" in the "regular course of business" would be subject to the law. But Hansen argued that this phrase could apply to any work produced by a Web publisher regardless of whether it is a common endeavor for the site.

The point is significant because many of the plaintiffs in the case are online news operations, booksellers, art galleries or other sites that do not exist to post sexually explicit materials but, on occasion, might. A gallery, for example, could well post an image of a nude or a news organization may have posted the report by the Whitewater independent counsel, Kenneth Starr, with its sexually graphic passages. "We believe it [the regular course of business] refers to a record made as part of the business," Hansen said.

Karen Y. Stewart, a Justice Department lawyer, insisted, however, that the term applied to businesses that regularly produce material "harmful to minors." "The character of its business is defined by communications of that sort," she said.

The lawyers also disagreed about a number of other fine points. Hansen, for example, argued that the law could apply to links and not just content or images on Web sites; Bhattacharyya disputed this.

The judge, whose measured tone throughout the six days of hearings has betrayed little indication of which way he might be leaning, also wondered why the words "educational" and "medical" were omitted from the definition of "harmful to minors."

Under the law, sexually explicit material is considered harmful to minors if it meets all parts of a three-part test. The third part is that the content must lack "scientific, literary, artistic, or political" value for minors. "Is sexually explicit educational or medical information that is not scientific, literary, artistic, or political similarly excluded?" Judge Reed wrote in his questions to the lawyers.

Hansen said that the omission is significant, because many state "harmful to minors" statutes pointedly include the two extra words. Bhattacharyya insisted, on the contrary, that educational and medical material would be protected under the broader meaning of "scientific, literary, artistic, or political" content.

The hearings, originally scheduled to last three days, in fact went on twice as long. The judge, in closing the hearings Wednesday morning, characterized the case as one of "major importance as a nationwide statute." In deciding the case, he said that he would "carry the burden" that the case requires.


Related Sites
These sites are not part of The New York Times on the Web, and The Times has no control over their content or availability.


Pamela Mendels at mendels@nytimes.com welcomes your comments and suggestions.



Lexis-Nexis: It's All You Need to Know

Home | Site Index | Site Search | Forums | Archives | Marketplace

Quick News | Page One Plus | International | National/N.Y. | Business | Technology | Science | Sports | Weather | Editorial | Op-Ed | Arts | Automobiles | Books | Diversions | Job Market | Real Estate | Travel

Help/Feedback | Classifieds | Services | New York Today

Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company

Credit Cards Seek New Fees on Web's Demimonde
The New York Times The New York Times Technology November 18, 2002  

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Business
Technology
- Circuits
- Columns
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies