Law Commons^™

The U.S. Supreme Court Addresses The Child Pornography Prevention Act And Child Online Protection Act In Ashcroft V. Free Speech Coalition And Ashcroft V. American Civil Liberties Union, Sue Ann Mota

Federal Communications Law Journal

Both the Child Pornography Prevention Act ("CPPA") and the Child Online Protection Act ("COPA") were intended by Congress to protect minors. The CPPA was intended to protect minors from the harmful effects of virtual child pornography. The COPA was intended to protect minors from pornography currently available commercially on the World Wide Web. However, in 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of both statutes: The Court struck down sections of the CPPA as overbroad and unconstitutional in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition. In Ashcroft v. ACLU, the Court upheld some sections of COPA as not unconstitutionally overbroad, but …

Injunctive Relief In The Internet Age: The Battle Between Free Speech And Trade Secrets, Adam W. Johnson

Federal Communications Law Journal

The information revolution has led to technological innovations in the movement, storage, and dissemination of information. The Internet allows a person, with good or bad intent, to distribute information to millions of people. This ability raises serious implications when trade secret information is the subject of Internet postings. Once a trade secret becomes publicly available, it loses its legal secrecy, and special legal protection. Additionally, competitors and everyone else on the Internet can gain access to the information. For those who rely on trade secret protection to guard their inventions, this presents a growing concern.

This Note will illustrate the …

The Indecency Of Unsolicited Sexually Explicit Email: A Comment On The Protection Of Free Speech V. The Protection Of Children, Monique Redford

Seattle University Law Review

Because the state of Washington has a compelling interest in protecting the moral and psychological welfare of its children, the current spam law should be amended to also proscribe the transmission of unsolicited sexually explicit commercial email within its borders. This article argues that such an amendment would not violate either the dormant Commerce Clause or the First Amendment. In support of this thesis, section II first addresses the pervasive problem of children-not just adults-receiving sexually explicit material via unsolicited email. Then, sections III through V discuss the implications of the dormant Commerce Clause, the First Amendment, and the policy …

Law And Information Platforms, Philip J. Weiser

Publications

No abstract provided.