[x-pubpol] Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction to Protect Free Speech after EFF Challenge

[Joly MacFie]

https://www.eff.org/press/releases/judge-grants-preliminary-injunction-protect-free-speech-after-eff-challenge



Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction to Protect Free Speech
after EFF Challenge

Court Blocks Enforcement of Dangerous New Jersey Law

Newark, NJ - A New Jersey federal district court judge
granted motions for a preliminary injunction today,
blocking the enforcement of a dangerous state law that
would put online service providers at risk by, among other
things, creating liability based on "indirect" publication
of content by speech platforms.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) argued for the
injunction in court on behalf of the Internet Archive, as
the statute conflicts directly with federal law and
threatens service providers who enable third party speech
online.

"The Constitution does not permit states to pass overbroad
and vague statutes that threaten protected speech.  The New
Jersey statute created that threat and the court was right
to block it," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Matt
Zimmerman.  "Similarly, Section 230 of the Communications
Decency Act prohibits the state from threatening to throw
online providers in jail for what their users do and the
statute violated that rule as well.  We are grateful that
the court recognized the importance of these bedrock
principles to online libraries and other platforms that
make the Internet the vital and robust tool it is today."

The New Jersey law at issue is an almost carbon-copy of a
Washington state law successfully blocked by EFF and the
Internet Archive last year.  While aimed at combatting
online ads for underage sex workers, it instead imposes
stiff criminal penalties on ISPs, Internet cafes, and
libraries that "indirectly" cause the publication or
display of content that might contain even an "implicit"
offer of a commercial sex act if the content includes an
image of a minor.  The penalties – up to 20 years in prison
and steep fines – would put enormous pressure on service
providers to block access to broad swaths of otherwise
protected material in order to avoid the vague threat of
prosecution.

"Within the past month, we've seen a coalition of state
attorneys general ask Congress to gut CDA 230 to make way
for harmful laws like New Jersey's," said Zimmerman.  "This
misguided proposal puts speech platforms at risk, which in
turn threatens online speech itself. Law enforcement can
and must pursue criminals vigorously but attacking the
platforms where people exercise their right to free speech
is the wrong strategy."

Backpage.com separately filed suit against this law,
represented by the law firm of Davis Wright Tremaine, who
also joined today's argument.

For more on this case:
https://www.eff.org/cases/internet-archive-v-hoffman

-----


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
 VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.isoc-ny.org/pipermail/x-pubpol-isoc-ny.org/attachments/20130809/618ad45d/attachment-0001.htm>