CIPA and the Library Board

posted 07/07/03
The United States Supreme Court recently struck down a lower court's ruling regarding the Children's Internet Protection Act, or CIPA. The lawsuit, brought by the American Library Association against the United States Government, claimed that CIPA violates the civil liberties of library patrons.

I am not a lawyer or a constitutional scholar, or even a law librarian (most of them have a J.D. in addition to their library degrees). I do have some knowledge and expertise in the practical meaning of CIPA and the Supreme Court's ruling.

The bottom line of CIPA, now that it is law, is that all libraries that receive Federal funds will be required to install filtering software on all public Internet-accessible computers.

Among librarians, the main philosophical argument against filtering is the abridgement of patrons' civil liberties, in the form of limiting the information to which they have access. This is an important issue, and people get very passionate about it. Then there are those who feel that protecting one child against one obscene image is more important than any civil liberty.

My argument, however, is a very practical one. I have been saying for several years that the day filters work is the day I will wholeheartedly endorse their use in the library.

What's a Filter, Anyway? A filter is a piece of software that blocks access to certain domains or websites based on a variety of criteria. There are two main types, and many companies produce different products.

One type bases its blocks on a list of keywords, like "breast" or "penis." The obvious problem with these filtering products is that they also block access to a great deal of important health information about, say, breast cancer or sexual dysfunction. In their opinions, "five [Supreme Court] justices plainly agreed with the lower court that filtering software blocks access to a significant amount of constitutionally protected speech."

The second type of filter blocks each domain, or URL, by the use of a "host file." This time- and labor-intensive process is the compiling of a massive list of sites that the software company deems to be objectionable, and blocks access to these sites. There are many problems with the host file technique - it's expensive, the files are outdated almost before they are put in place, and also we are forced to accept a corporation's idea of what's ok and what's not. According to the American Library Association, "filtering companies are not following legal definitions of 'harmful to minors' and 'obscenity."

The reality is that, just like any big city or small town (or idyllic island), on the Internet there are a lot of really good people and a few I'd rather not meet in a dark alley. The public library is a public space, created by and for the public good. I am committed to maintaining the goodness and safety of the library, while still providing for the information needs of island residents.

Having said all this, CIPA is the law. The issue before now is: do we install the software, or do we decline all future Federal money? For some libraries, like San Juan Island, this is not a big financial decision; we receive very little money from the US Government. For large systems like King County and Seattle Public, upwards of half a million a year is at stake.

I wouldn't want to be a trustee on their board right now.

Lauren Stara
Director, San Juan Island Library
phone number 360.378.2798
e-mail lstara@sjlib.org

news @sanjuanislander.com

ABOUT US | ADVERTISING INFO | CONTACT INFORMATION |

Related pages

Previous columns

CIPA and the Library Board