* Jack N. & Lillian R. Berkman Assistant Professor for Entrepreneurial Legal Studies, Harvard Law School. I thank Terry Fisher, Megan Kirk, Molly Shaffer van Houweling, and participants in the University of Pennsylvania Legal Studies Workshop for insights on earlier drafts, and Peter Sand in the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office and Craig Silliman at WorldCom for very helpful discussions.
1 Peter Johnson, Pornography Drives Technology: Why Not to Censor the Internet, 49 Fed. Comm. L.J. 217, 217 (1996).
2 See Youth, Pornography, and the Internet 72 (Dick Thornburgh & Herbert S. Lin eds., 2002) (“Compared to the totality of content on the public World Wide Web, adult oriented sites account for a relatively small fraction (about 1.5 percent). However, these sites account for a significant amount of Web traffic. According to industry statistics, approximately 70 million different individuals per week view at least one adult Web site on a global basis . . . .”).
³ See Lawrence Lessig, The Future of Ideas 178–79 (2001).
3 See generally, e.g., Raymond S. R. Ku et al., Cyberspace Law (2002) (over 70% of the cases involved pilfering or prurient material); Mark A. Lemley et al., Software and Internet Law (2000) (80% of the cases in the Internet law portion of the book involved pilfering or prurient material); Peter B. Maggs et al., 2002 Supplement to Internet and Computer Law (over 60% of the cases involved pilfering or prurient material).
4 On the side of anarchy: see generally, for example, David R. Johnson & David Post, Law and Borders—The Rise of Law in Cyberspace, 48 Stan. L. Rev. 1367, 1375 (1996); Symposium, Fundamental Rights on the Information Superhighway: Keynote Address, 1994 Ann. Surv. Am. L. 355; John Perry Barlow, The Economy of Ideas, Wired, Mar. 1994. On the increasing emergence of control, see generally, Lawrence Lessig, The Limits in Open Code: Regulatory Standards and the Future of the Net, 14 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 2 (1999), available at http:// www.law.berkeley.edu/journals/btlj/articles/vol14/Lessig/html/text.html.
5 See 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. � 7330 (2002) (Section 7330 was repealed by 2002, Dec. 16, P.L. 1953, No. 226, Section 2, but it was replaced by an essentially identical set of statutes. 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. �� 7621–30 (2003)).
6 See generally Douglas E. Comer, Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1: Principles, Protocols, and Architectures (4th ed. 2000) (field’s classic text detailing internetworking).
7 One can watch a report of the path a packet takes from one’s computer to a given destination through the use of “traceroute,” usually abbreviated as “tracert” in Windows environments.
8 Compare Playboy Enters. v. Webbworld, 991 F. Supp. 543 (N.D. Tex. 1997) (in which the creator of an Internet site which sold adult images from newsgroups was liable for copyright infringement), with Religious Tech. Ctr. v. Netcom On-Line Communications Servs., 907 F. Supp. 1361 (N.D. Cal. 1995) (where an Internet access provider/bulletin board service operator was held not directly liable for copyright infringement, in part because it was considered a “mere conduit” for unaltered information.)
9 See 18 U.S.C �� 1462, 1465 (2000). See generally U.S. v. Thomas, 74 F.3d 701 (6th Cir. 1996).
10 See generally Thomas, 74 F.3d at 710, 711.
11 See 47 U.S.C � 223(a)(1)(B)(ii) (2000).
12 See id.
13 See Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844, 874 (1997).
14 See id. at 874–75.
15 See id. at 876–77.
16 See id. at 874.
17 Congress has taken at least one additional (still constitutionally unsuccessful) stab at regulating Internet speakers in this area, passing the Children’s Online Protection Act. See 47 U.S.C. � 231(a)(1) (2000). COPA limits its reach to commercial speech and narrows the standard of covered material from indecency to that which is “harmful to minors,” and litigation over the provisions continues. See generally Ashcroft v. ACLU, 535 U.S. 564 (2002); ACLU v. Ashcroft, 322 F.3d 240 (3d Cir. 2003).
18 See 18 U.S.C � 2257 (2000); 28 C.F.R. � 75 (2002).
19 Search performed on Google using “18 U.S.C. 2257” (Dec. 10, 2002).
20 Id.
21 See FDA, Advertising / Labeling Definitions, at http://www.fda.gov/cder/handbook/ adverdef.htm (last visited Apr. 30, 2003) (definition of advertising).
22 See generally, e.g., SEC v. SG, Ltd., 265 F.3d 42 (1st Cir. 2001).
23 See generally, e.g., FTC v. Ken Roberts Co., 276 F.3d 583 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
24 See, e.g., Blumenthal v. Drudge, 992 F. Supp. 44, 51 (D.D.C. 1998).
25 See, e.g., Religious Tech. Ctr. v. Lerma, 908 F. Supp. 1362, 1368 (E.D. Va. 1995).
26 See generally U.S. v. Rothberg, No. 00CR85, 2002 WL 171963 (N.D. Ill. 2002) (finding criminal copyright infringement); Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp., 77 F. Supp. 2d 1116 (C.D. Cal. 1999) (finding civil copyright infringement).
27 See generally U.S. v. LaMacchia, 871 F. Supp. 535 (D. Mass. 1994).
28 See No Electronic Theft Act, 17 U.S.C �� 101, 506, 507 (2000); 18 U.S.C �� 2319, 2319A, 2320 (2000), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/17–18red. htm (reversing the state of the law as interpreted in LaMacchia, 871 F. Supp. 535).
29 See Steve Silberman, Caught in the Kid Porn Crusade, Wired, Oct. 2002, available at http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.10/kidporn_pr.html; see also Declan McCullagh, DOJ to Swappers: Law Is Not on Your Side, CNet News.com, Aug. 20, 2002, available at http:// news.com.com/2100-1023-954591.html.
30 See generally Austan Goolsbee & Jonathan Zittrain, Evaluating the Costs and Benefits of Taxing Internet Commerce, 52 Nat’l Tax J. 413 (1999).
31 See, e.g., Melvin v. Doe 789 A.2d 696, 697 (Pa. 2001), appeal granted by 805 A.2d 525 (Pa. Aug. 20, 2002); Carl S. Kaplan, Companies Fight Anonymous Critics with Lawsuits, Cyber L.J., Mar. 12, 1999, available at http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech /99/03/cyber/cyber law/12law.html.
32 See 18 U.S.C �� 2702–2703 (2000); 47 U.S.C � 551 (2000).
33 See, e.g., Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C �� 2701–2711(2000); Cable Communications Policy Act, 47 U.S.C �� 521–611 (2000); U.S. v. Kennedy, 81 F. Supp. 2d 1103, 1107, 1111–14 (D. Kan. 2000). But see Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. �� 2510–2522 (2000); id. �� 3121–3127 (regarding pen registers and trap and trace devices); In re Application of United States of Am. for an Order Pursuant to 18 U.S.C � 2703(D), 157 F. Supp. 2d 286, 288–92 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) (concluding that the government disclosure provision in � 551(h) of the CCPA does not apply to internet service provided via cable).
34 See, e.g., Melvin v. Doe 789 A.2d 696, 697 (Pa. 2001), appeal granted by 805 A.2d 525 (Pa. Aug. 20, 2002); Carl S. Kaplan, Companies Fight Anonymous Critics with Lawsuits, Cyber L.J., Mar. 12, 1999, available at http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/03/cyber/cy-berlaw/12law.html.
35 See generally, e.g., In re Subpoena Duces Tecum to Am. Online, Inc., No. 40570, 2000 WL 1210372 (Va. Cir. 2000). The fights over ISP assistance in uncovering and divulging the identities of users alleged—but not proven—to have engaged in actionable behavior is becoming known as the “John Doe” problem. See Chilling Effects, John Doe Anonymity, available at http://www.chillingeffects.org/johndoe (last visited Apr. 22, 2003); CyberSLAPP.org, Homepage, available at http://www.cyberslapp.org/intro.cfm (last visited Apr. 22, 2003).
36 See Recording Indus. Ass’n of Am. v. Verizon Internet Servs., 240 F. Supp. 2d 24 (D.D.C. 2002), available at http://www.techlawjournal.com/courts2002/riaa_verizon/ 20030121.asp; Motion to Enforce July 24, 2002 Subpoena Issued By This Court to Verizon Internet Services, Inc. and Memorandum in Support Thereof, In Re: Verizon Internet Services, Inc., (D.D.C. 2002) (No. 1:02MS00323), available at http://www.riaa.com/pdf/ RIAAMotionToEnforce.pdf; RIAA, RIAA Asks Court to Enforce Limited Information Subpoena, Aug. 20, 2002, available at http://www.riaa.com/News_Story.cfm?id=547.
37 See 17 U.S.C. � 512(h) (2000).
38 See id.
39 See RIAA, 240 F. Supp. 2d at 44.
40 Yahoo! v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme Et l’Antisemitisme, 169 F. Supp. 2d 1181, 1194 (N.D. Cal. 2001).
41 See, e.g., Jim Lippard & Jeff Jacobsen, Scientology v. the Internet: Free Speech & Copyright Infringement on the Information Super-Highway, 3 Skeptic 3, 35–41 (1995), available at http:// www.skeptic.com/03.3.jl-jj-scientology.html; Declan McCullagh, Google Yanks Anti-Church Sites, Wired News, Mar. 21, 2002, available at http://www.wired.com/news/politics/ 0,1283,51233,00.html.
42 See Yahoo! GeoCities, Terms of Service, available at http://docs.yahoo.com/info/ terms/geoterms.html (last visited Jan. 11, 2003); Lycos (Angelfire), Terms and Conditions, available at http://info.lycos.com/legal/legal.asp (last visited Jan. 11, 2003).
43 See Declan McCullagh, Yahoo! in Porn Foe’s Sights, Wired News, Jun. 19, 2001, available at http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,44619,00.html.
44 An argument to this effect might be based on the distributor function that both OSPs and bookstores serve. There is at least some prospect that bookstores could be held responsible for carrying obscene books. Under Roth v. U.S., obscenity is not protected speech. 354 U.S. 476, 492 (1956). In that case, both (1) possession of obscene materials for sale and advertising and (2) mailing obscene materials, as in a mail-order business, were at issue. Id. at 480–81. The Court determined that states could prohibit these activities. Id. at 492–94. Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, reiterated this notion, and specifically mentioned adult bookstores. 413 U.S. 49, 67–69 (1973). Paris suggested that, if a bookstore carried obscene materials, access to the bookstore could be restricted or even wholly denied. Id. at 58 n.7.
45 See generally Silberman, supra note 30.
46 See Edmund L. Andrews, German Court Overturns Pornography Ruling Against CompuServe, N.Y. Times, Nov. 18, 1999, available at http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/ 99/11 /biztech/articles/18compuserve-germany.html.
47 See State v. Maxwell, 767 N.E.2d 242, 248–50 (Ohio 2002).
48 See generally, e.g., Cubby, Inc. v. CompuServe, Inc., 776 F. Supp. 135 (S.D.N.Y. 1991); Stratton Oakmont v. Prodigy Serv. Co., No. 31063/94, 1995 WL 323710 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1995).
49 47 U.S.C. � 230(c) (2000).
50 Id.
51 Id. � 230(e).
52 See, e.g., Ben Ezra, Weinstein & Co. v. Am. Online, Inc., 206 F.3d 980, 984–86 (10th Cir. 2000); Zeran v. Am. Online, Inc., 129 F.3d 327, 330–34 (4th Cir. 1997); Blumenthal v. Drudge, 992 F. Supp. 44, 49–52 (D.D.C. 1998); Jonathan Zittrain, The Rise and Fall of Sysopdom, 10 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 495, 509–12 (1997).
53 See, e.g., Zittrain, supra note 53, at 506–12.
54 See generally Marobie-FL, Inc. v. Nat’l Ass’n of Fire Equip. Distrib., 983 F. Supp. 1167 (N.D. Ill. 1997) (the real party in interest that created a Web site might be held liable for copyright infringement, but not the OSP hosting that Web site); Sega Enter. Ltd. v. MAPHIA, 948 F. Supp. 923 (N.D. Cal. 1996); Religious Tech. Ctr. v. Netcom On-Line Comm., 907 F. Supp. 1361 (N.D. Cal. 1995).
55 See Playboy, 991 F. Supp. at 549 (in which the OSP acted more as a simple commercial portal, retrieving copyright images from elsewhere on the Internet and selling them to its own subscribers); Playboy Enters. v. Frena, 839 F. Supp. 1552, 1559 (M.D. Fla. 1993) (in which the defendant appeared to be processing the contents of his bulletin board service in a more hands-on way than a typical large-scale OSP).
56 17 U.S.C. � 512(c) (2000).
57 Id. � 512(g).
58 Id. � 512(a).
59 See, e.g., Lunney v. Prodigy Servs. Co., 723 N.E.2d 539, 541 (1999) (defamation).
60 See 18 U.S.C � 2511 (2000).
61 See 17 U.S.C � 512(a).
62 See id. � 512(j).
63 See id.
64 See id.
65 Letter from Courtney Bickel Lamberth, Allston Burr Senior Tutor, Winthrop House, Harvard University, to Aaron Koller, Undergraduate Student, Harvard University (Oct. 17, 2001) (on file with author), available at http://www.chillingeffects.org/copyright/notice. cgi?NoticeID=212.
66 Id.
67 Id.
68 For example, NetPD provides “protection services to copyright owners whose material is being pirated through the internet.” NetPD, History, available at http://www. netpd.com/a.htm (last visited Jan. 11, 2003). NetPD employs patented search technology to locate infringing material online, and “[s]earch results are used for detailed strategic planning, to assist in tactical execution, for evidence in support of major litigation, and/or as the basis of a copyright control program.” Id. Automated removal of infringing material is also possible: “[a]t the client’s request, NetPD uses an automated process to carry out rapid, bulk removal of infringing files being offered for free downloading. The process is capable of being controlled by filters which can ensure a ‘fan friendly’ approach in which different actions can be taken against sites based on the profile of the site. If and when the files reappear, the infringing sites are detected, challenged and removed again.” Id.
69 See, e.g., Letter from Howard E. King, Attorney, on behalf of Metallica and Dr. Dre, to Neil L. Rudenstine, President, Harvard University (Sept. 6, 2000), available at http:// www.itcom.itd.umich.edu/mp3/mp3ltr.html. Similar letters were sent to Columbia University, University of Virginia, Stanford University, Boston University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Princeton University, University of Michigan, University of California at Berkeley, University of California at Los Angeles, and approximately fifteen other large universities.
70 See Kate L. Rakoczy, Computing Services Restricts Outbound Traffic on Network, Harv. Crimson, Feb. 16, 2001, available at http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=103233.
71 David E. Sorkin, Technical and Legal Approaches to Unsolicited Electronic Mail, 35 U.S.F. L. Rev. 325, 363, 367 (2001).
72 See, e.g., Microsoft Internet Explorer, Configuring Content Advisor Settings, available at http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/using/howto/contentadv/config.asp (last visited Jan. 10, 2003); N2H2, Homepage, available at http://www.N2H2.com (last visited Jan. 10, 2003); Net Nanny, Homepage, available at http://www.netnanny.com (last visited Jan. 10, 2003); Secure Computing, Homepage, available at http://www.securecomputing.com/index-js.shtml (last visited Jan. 10, 2003); SurfControl, Homepage, available at http://www.surf-control.com (last visited Jan. 10, 2003); Websense, Homepage, available at http://www.web-sense.com (last visited Jan. 10, 2003).
73 See, e.g., Secure Computing, Products-at-a-Glance, available at http://www.securecom-puting.com/index.cfm?sKeys=86 (last visited Jan. 10, 2003); SurfControl, URL Category List, available at http://www.surfcontrol.com/products/content/internet_databases/url_ category_list/default.aspx (last visited Jan. 10, 2003); Websense, Advanced Filtering with Premium Group Categories, available at http://www.websense.com/products/premium groups/index.cfm (last visited Dec. 5, 2002); Websense, Websense Master Database: Categories, available at http://www.websense.com/products/about/database/categories.cfm (last visit-ed Dec. 5, 2002).
74 See generally Children’s Internet Protection Act, Pub. L. No. 106–554, 114 Stat. 2763A–335 (2002) (conditioning libraries’ receipt of grants under the Library Services and Technology Act, 20 U.S.C �� 9101–9176 (2000), and “E-rate discounts” for Internet access and support under the Telecommunications Act, 47 U.S.C � 254 (2000)).
75 See Mainstream Loudoun v. Bd. of Trs. of Loudoun County Library, 24 F. Supp. 2d 552, 556, 570 (E.D. Va. 1998).
76 See id. at 566–68, 570; see also Am. Library Ass’n v. U.S., 201 F. Supp. 2d 401, 436–50, 470–96 (E.D. Pa. 2002).
77 An April 2000 American Management Association Research Report found that 63% of large and medium-sized businesses monitor their employees’ Internet use, and 40% block access to unauthorized or inappropriate Web sites. See generally Terry Carter, Untangling the Web: Law Firms Seek to Avoid Injudicious Use of Internet Resources, A.B.A. J., Sept. 2001, available at http://www.websense.com/company/news/misuse/01/090101.cfm; see also David Greenfield, Web@Work Employer Survey 2001: Termination and Litigation, available at http://www.websense.com/company/news/research/webatwork-employer2001.pdf (indicating that 71% of companies block pornography).
78 See N2H2, Internet Usage and Legal Liability, available at http://home.zen.co.uk /assets/pdf/liability_whitepaper.pdf (last visited Jan. 11, 2003).
79 See SIIA, Anti-Piracy: Report Piracy, available at http://www.siia.net/piracy /report/default.asp (last visited Dec. 6, 2002) (providing web forms to report piracy).
80 See Websense, Macrovision and Websense Announce New Partnership to Prevent Unauthorized Digital Material in the Workplace, available at http://www.websense.com/company/ news/pr/02/100702b.cfm (last visited Jan. 11, 2003).
81 See Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act, S. 2048, 107th Cong. (2002); Security Systems Standards and Certification Act, Draft Senate Bill 107th Cong. (2001); Jonathan L. Zittrain, Taming the Consumer’s Computer, N.Y. Times, Mar. 11, 2002, at A21.
82 Technology and Record Company Policy Principles, available at http://www.bsa.org/usa/ policyres/7_principles.pdf (last visited Feb. 12, 2003).
83 See id.
84 See generally Silberman, supra note 30.
85 See id.
86 See id.
87 From a legal perspective, an attempt to hold a destination ISP responsible for the content it carries would likely be viewed as functionally equivalent to attempting to enforce liability against source ISPs since both ISPs are acting as “mere conduits.” See supra notes 54–55 and accompanying text.
88 Based on year-end 2000 revenue figures, the top ten ISPs in the U.S. accounted for more than 66% of the total market share; the top four companies accounted for just over half of the market share. Denise Pappalardo, The ISP Top Dogs, Network World Internet Services Newsletter, May 30, 2001, available at http://www.nwfusion.com/newsletters/ isp/2001/00846039.html. According to India Infoline Sector Reports on Internet Service Providers AOL is the largest retail ISP, with over 22 million subscribers and 40% of that market segment. India Infoline Sector Reports: Internet Service Providers, at http://www.indiain foline.com/sect/itsp/ch05.html (last visited Apr. 30, 2003). AOL’s share is more than the next twenty ISPs’ shares combined. Id. UUNet has a 26% market share in the business segment, 43% in the wholesale segment, and 17% in the value-added services market; UUNet has around double the market share of its nearest competitor in all three segments. Id.
89 Jennifer 8. Lee, Companies Compete to Provide Saudi Internet Veil, N.Y. Times, Nov. 19, 2001, at C1–4, available at http://www.websense.com/company/news/companynews/01/ 111901.cfm.
90 See Michael S. Chase & James C. Mulvenon, You’ve Got Dissent! Chinese Dissident Use of the Internet and Beijing’s Counter-Strategies, at xii (2002), available at http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1543/; Lee, supra note 90, at C1–4; Jonathan Zittrain & Benjamin Edelman, Documentation of Internet Filtering Worldwide, available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filtering (last updated Apr. 3, 2003).
91 18 Pa. Const. Stat. � 7330(a) (2002) (Section 7330 was repealed by 2002, Dec. 16, P.L. 1953, No. 226, Section 2, but it was replaced by an essentially identical set of statutes. 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. �� 7621–30 (2003)).
92 See id. � 7330(b).
93 Id. � 7330(a), (c).
94 Id. � 7330(c).
95 See Marnie Affidavit of Probable Cause, In the Matter of the Application of D. Michael Fisher, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for an Order Requiring an Internet Service Provider to Remove or Disable Access to Child Pornography (July 2002) (No. Misc. 689) (on file with author).
96 Id.
97 See Sept. 17, 2002 Order of Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, In the Matter of the Application of D. Michael Fisher, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for an Order Requiring an Internet Service Provider to Remove or Disable Access to Child Pornography (July 2002) (No. Misc. 689) (on file with author).
98 Letter from Craig Silliman, Director of Technology and Network Legal, WorldCom, to John J. Burfete, Jr., Chief Deputy Attorney General, Office of Attorney General of Pennsylvania (Sept. 23, 2002) (on file with author).
99 Id.
100 Id.
101 See Am. Library Ass’n v. Pataki, 969 F. Supp. 160, 183–84 (S.D.N.Y. 1997).
102 Id. at 184.
103 See id. at 183–84.
104 See generally, e.g., Lawrence Lessig, The Zones of Cyberspace, 48 Stan. L. Rev. 1403 (1996).
105 See Interim Court Order, County Court of Paris, France (Nov. 22, 2000), available at http://www.cdt.org/speech/international/001120yahoofrance.pdf (containing the Opinion of the Consultants Ben Laurie, Fran�ois Wallon and Vinton Cerf, La Ligue Contre Le Racisme Et l’Antisemitisme and L’Union Des Etudiants Juifs De France v. Yahoo!, Inc. and Yahoo France).
106 See id.
107 See generally New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (1982) (classifying child pornography as a category of material outside the protection of the First Amendment).
108 See 18 Pa. Const. Stat. � 7330(f) (2002).
109 That the determination may be made ex parte is provided in 18 Pa. Const. Stat. Ann. � 7330(f). While there is detailed provision for the targeted ISP to get notice of an action under this statute, there is no provision in � 7330 for notification of the source of the offending material. See 18 Pa. Const. Stat. � 7330(g).
110 Under Near v. Minnesota ex rel. Olson, prior restraints were found to be highly disfavored. 283 U.S. 697 (1931). The only exception the Court allowed to the unconstitutionality of prior restraints was the “troopship exception,” which is roughly equivalent to very strict scrutiny. See id. at 715–16. The disfavored character of prior restraints was also evident in the Court’s decision in New York Times v. U.S., where two justices found an absolute bar to prior restraints, one justice indicated that they would be subject to strict scrutiny, and two justices recognized that U.S. constitutional law provides “extraordinary protection against prior restraints.” 403 U.S. 713, 714–15, 726–27, 730 (1971).
111 The ex parte procedure employed in this hypothetical would run afoul of the Court’s holding in Freedman v. Maryland, that certain procedural protections were required to avoid the unconstitutionality of a prior restraint. 380 U.S. 51, 60 (1965). Among other procedural considerations, the Freedman Court indicated that a judicial determination in an adversary proceeding must be available before the restraint has finality. See id. at 59. Since putting the papers in the dump would likely be considered “final,” the ex parte proceeding would probably not pass constitutional muster. See id. at 60. Also under procedural due process law, namely the Court’s decision in Mathews v. Eldridge, the necessary procedural protections would be determined by balancing the Mathews factors: the significance of the private interest that would be affected by the government action; the extent to which additional procedural safeguards would reduce the risk of error; and the public’s interest in resolving the matter quickly and efficiently. 424 U.S. 319, 335 (1976).
112 See 18 Pa. Conts. Stat. � 7330 (lacking a time limit provision).
113 This is precisely what was found to be unconstitutional in Near. 283 U.S. at 721.
114 See supra Section I.
115 See generally Doe v. 2TheMart.com Inc., 140 F. Supp.2d 1088 (W.D.Wash. 2001).
116 Id.
117 See, e.g., Virginia State Bd. of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Counsel, 425 U.S. 748, 756–72 (1976) (finding that consumer have First Amendment-protected interests in receiving certain commercial information).
118 See 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. � 7330 (2002) (failing to mention any notice to Internet users).
119 See On-Line Hacker Jargon File: Version 4.3.3, Internet Death Penalty (Sept. 20, 2002), available at http://jargon.watson-net.com/lexicon.asp?L=O.
120 See supra Section I.
121 See Jonathan Zittrain & Benjamin Edelman, Empirical Analysis of Internet Filtering in China (Nov. 2002), available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filtering/china/; see also Chase & Mulvenon, supra note 91, at xii; Jonathan Zittrain & Benjamin Edelman, Real-Time Testing of Internet Filtering in China, available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu /filtering/china/test/ (last visited Apr. 23, 2003).
122 Sept. 17, 2002 Order of Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, In the Matter of the Application of D. Michael Fisher, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for an Order Requiring an Internet Service Provider to Remove or Disable Access to Child Pornography, (July 2002) (No. Misc. 689) (on file with author).
123 See Zittrain & Edelman, supra note 91.
124 Notice Under 18 Pa. Const. Stat. � 7330, In the Matter of the Application of D. Michael Fisher, Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, Pa. Criminal Division (July 2002) (No. Misc. 689) (on file with author).
125 Letter from D. Michael Fisher, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, to Craig Silliman, Attorney, WorldCom Network and Facilities Legal Team (Sept. 17, 2002) (on file with author).
126 Letter from Craig Silliman, supra note 99.
127 See supra Section I.A.
128 A&M Records v. Napster, Inc., 2000 WL 1009483, at *8 (N.D. Cal. July 26, 2000).
129 Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Sony Corp. of Am., 480 F. Supp. 429, 469 (D.C. Cal. 1979). Without dwelling on possible approaches to reengineer the VCR to better restrict infringing uses while permitting noninfringing ones, the Court may well have considered playback-only VCR’s differently from those with both recording and playback capabilities.
130 Id. at 468–69.
131 Assembly No. 2863, 210th Leg. (N.J. 2002), available at http://www.njleg.state.nj. us/2002/Bills/A3000/12863_l1.PDF (no longer available) (not yet enacted into law, the bill is available online).
132 Internet Child Pornography Act, R.S.C., ch. C-234 (2002) (Can.), available at http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/2/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/private/C-234/C-234_1/3720 10bE.html.
133 See Germany: The Idea of Internet Providers Blocking Illegal Content is Questionable, 8 Safer Internet, Nov. 2001, at 3, available at http://www.saferinternet.org/news/safer8. htm; see also Heise Online, Haftung f�r rechtswidrige Inhalte fraglich, Oct. 15, 2001, available at http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/hod-15.10.01-000/ (for a description in German of the first German court’s decision in this case); Vigilant.tv, Heise: Duesseldorf Arranges Immediate Blockage of Nazi Websites, Sept. 13, 2002, available at http://vigilant.tv/article/2162 (describing second German court’s reiteration of the blocking order).
134 17 U.S.C. � 512(j) (2000).
135 See supra Figure 1.
136 See generally Complaint, Arista Records, Inc. et al. v. AT&T Broadband Corp. et al., No. 02 CV 6554 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 2002) (on file with author).
137 Id. � 39.
138 Id. � 40.
139 Id. � 43.
140 Id.
141 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, Arista Records, Inc. et al. v. AT&T Broadband Corp. et al., (KMW) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 21, 2002) (No. 02 CV 6554) (on file with author).
142 17 U.S.C. � 512(j)(1)(B) (2000).
143 Id. � 512(j)(2).
144 See Jonathan Zittrain & Benjamin Edelman, Replacement of Google with Alternative Search Systems in China, Sept. 10, 2002, available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filtering/ china/google-replacements/.
145 Id.
146 Id.
147 Id.
148 J.H. Saltzer et al., End-to-End Arguments in System Design, Second International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems 509–512 (Apr. 1981), available at http:// web.mit.edu/Saltzer/www/publications/endtoend/endtoend.mss.
149 Id.
150See, e.g., Mark Lemley & Lawrence Lessig, The End of End-to-End: Preserving the Architecture of the Internet in the Broadband Era, 2000 Berkeley Law & Economics Working Papers, available at http://www.bepress.com/blewp/default/vol2000/iss2/art8; Written Ex Parte of Professor Mark A. Lemley and Professor Lawrence Lessig, In re Application for Consent to the Transfer of Control of Licenses MediaOne Group, Inc. to AT&T Corp., (F.C.C. 1999) (CS No. 99–251), available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/works/lessig/ cable/fcc/fcc.html.
151 David D. Clark et al., Tussle in Cyberspace: Defining Tomorrow’s Internet, SIGCOMM (2002), available at http://www.acm.org/sigcomm/sigcomm2002/papers/tussle.pdf.
152 Lawrence Lessig, Tyranny in the Infrastructure, 5.07 Wired (July 1997), available at http://www.wired.com/wired/5.07/cyber_rights_pr.html.