Skip to main content
Podcast Episode: Fighting Enshittification

EFFector - Volume 14, Issue 13 - So. Korean Government Adopts Mandatory Internet Content Ratings


EFFector - Volume 14, Issue 13 - So. Korean Government Adopts Mandatory Internet Content Ratings

   EFFector       Vol. 14, No. 13       June 29, 2001

   A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation     ISSN 1062-9424

    IN THE 173rd ISSUE OF EFFECTOR (now with over 27,600 subscribers!):

     * ACTION ALERT: So. Korean Government Adopts Mandatory Internet
       Content Ratings
     * Conviction of Scientology Critic Raises Free Speech Issue
     * EFF Housewarming Party and BayFF at our New Location on Shotwell
       Street - Tuesday, July 10th
     * Help Working Assets Donate to EFF
     * CHIPA: The Talk of the Librarian Conference
     * EFF-Recommended Reading: Heins's Not in Front of the Children
     * Thank you to EFF Volunteer Michael Mathews
     * Pretrial Appeal of Anonymous Speech Victory Denied

   For more information on EFF activities & alerts:

   To join EFF or make an additional donation:
   EFF is a member-supported non-profit. Please sign up as a member

So. Korean Government Adopts Mandatory Internet Content Ratings

  Immediate action needed!

    Electronic Frontier Foundation ACTION ALERT

    (Issued: June 29, 2001 / Deadline: July 1, 2001)

   The Web version of this alert can be found at:


   South Korean nonprofit organizations, including the Collaboration
   Action Group Against Information and Communication Censorship, have
   called for worldwide protests over the enforcement starting July 1,
   2001, of Internet content rating provisions of the Korean
   Communications Decency Act (KCDA).

   According to the Korean Progressive Network (JinboNet), the Korean
   Ministry of Information and Communication (KMIC) slipped the provision
   requiring Internet content rating of all websites into the KCDA in
   April 2001, even though the content rating provisions were explicitly
   removed in response to protests prior to the original passage of the
   legislation last year.

   The KCDA also apparently prohibits most forms of online protest
   starting July 1, such as posting protest messages on Internet message
   boards, sending many protest messages to one server (like the KMIC
   server), and virtual sit-ins, also known as denial of service (DoS)

  What YOU Can Do Now:

   Prior to July 1, activists around the world, and hundreds of Korean
   organizations, are taking the following actions:

     * Online website strike: All protesting organizations will place an
       agreed-upon webpage on their sites so it appears when visitors
       first enter their site for about 72 hours from June 29 to July 1.
       The web page will display information and links related to the

       Display this image on your site:
       with a link to the English-language protest page at either protest
       Korean-language page available from:

     * E-mail, fax, or phone protest messages to the Korean Government:

          + Cheong Wa Dae, e-mail, tel. +82
          + Korean Ministry of Information & Communication, e-mail
  , message board
            tel. +82 2-750-2000 (general inquiries), +82 2-750-2114 (help
          + Information & Communication Ethics Committee, e-mail
  , tel. +82 2-3415-0154, fax +82

     * E-mail messages expressing support for the Korean opposition to
       government-mandated Internet content rating systems to Jinbonet at and

   These Korean organizations have invited concerned international
   organizations and individuals to take action in solidarity with the
   Korean anti-censorship movement.

   The Electronic Frontier Foundation is pleased to support JinboNet and
   the other Korean organizations opposed to government-mandated Internet
   content rating systems.

  Blue Ribbon Campaign:

   EFF's participation in the effort to oppose Internet censorship in
   Korea is part of our larger campaign to highlight dangers to online
   freedom of expression and press. Launched in 1995, the Blue Ribbon
   Campaign for Online Free Speech remains one of the largest Net-based
   grassroots political movements. For more infomration about the
   campaign, including latest Internet free expression news, ways you can
   help, and links to more resources, see:

  About EFF:

   The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading civil liberties
   organization working to protect rights in the digital world. Founded
   in 1990, EFF actively encourages and challenges industry and
   government to support free expression, privacy, and openness in the
   information society. EFF is a member-supported organization and
   maintains one of the most linked-to websites in the world:


     Will Doherty, EFF Online Activist / Media Relations
     +1 415 436 9333 x111

     Katina Bishop, EFF Offline Activist / Education Dir.
     +1 415 436 9333 x101

                                  - end -

Conviction of Scientology Critic Raises Free Speech Issue

  Electronic Frontier Foundation Concerned US Court Violated Free Speech Rights

    Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Release

    For Immediate Release: June 22, 2001


     Cindy Cohn, EFF Legal Director,,
       +1 415 436 9333 x108

   San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today
   expressed concern over a California court conviction of H. Keith
   Henson in a case involving online criticism of the Church of
   Scientology (CoS). In a decision which appears to have violated his
   constitutional right to free speech, a jury in Riverside County
   convicted Henson of threatening the free exercise of religion by
   members of the CoS.

   "We are deeply concerned that the decision violates Mr. Henson's free
   speech rights," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "Since he does not
   appear to have made any credible threat of physical attack as required
   for conviction under the U.S. Constitution, Mr. Henson has a legal
   right to express criticisms online without fearing a prison term."

   On April 26, 2001, Henson was convicted of threatening to interfere
   with the CoS members' freedom to enjoy their constitutional right to
   the free exercise of religion. Although official trial documents are
   not yet available, the verdict seems based on Henson's activities
   while picketing the CoS desert compound and postings on the Internet
   alt.religion.scientology newsgroup. It appears that the postings
   admitted into evidence included only fragments of longer postings or
   threads taken out of context. For example, the defense was apparently
   prohibited from showing that a comment about "cruise missiles" was
   made in response to a joke about actor Tom Cruise. The trial judge
   also allegedly forbid Henson from explaining why he was protesting

   Henson was also accused of making and attempting to make terrorist
   threats against the CoS, however the jury convicted only on a single
   misdemeanor charge under a California "hate crime" statute. EFF is
   concerned that the jury may have convicted Henson on this one charge
   based on misinformation and mislabeling of evidence introduced at

   The basic requirements for conviction under California Penal Code
   section 422.6 are that "force or the threat of force" must be involved
   and that "the speech itself threatened violence against a specific
   person or group of persons and that the defendant had the apparent
   ability to carry out the threat."

   Neither of these requirements appear to have been met in Henson's
   case. For instance, Henson's discussions apparently included
   long-range missile systems in connection with the CoS desert compound.
   Such statements seem inadequate to substantiate a reasonable fear that
   he would actually launch or have the ability to launch a missile
   attack against anyone.

   Furthermore, a recent decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals,
   Planned Parenthood v. American Coalition of Life Activists, clarified
   that strong advocacy is protected expression stating, "it doesn't
   matter if the speech makes future violence more likely; advocating
   'illegal action at some indefinite future time' is protected."

   Following his conviction, Henson took refuge in Canada where, based on
   information Scientology sent to authorities, he was arrested in a
   shopping mall parking lot, by a heavily armed paramilitary unit.
   However, Canadian officials later released Henson and accepted his
   application for asylum.

   In a May 30th phone interview with the Toronto Star newspaper,
   Henson's wife said that he is being targeted by the CoS because he has
   been working to expose the group as a crime syndicate for five years.

   EFF Executive Director Shari Steele commented, "EFF is deeply
   disturbed by these possible violations of Mr. Henson's constitutional
   rights. This trial seems intended to punish Mr. Henson for his
   opposition to a powerful organization, using the barest thread of
   legal justification to do so. EFF joins Mr. Henson's American counsel
   in urging the California Court of Appeals to set aside this verdict
   and confirm Mr. Henson's right to protest publicly a group that he

   For more information on the Henson case, see:

   For the public alt.religion.scientology postings, see:

   Related media coverage:

  About EFF:

   The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading civil liberties
   organization working to protect rights in the digital world. Founded
   in 1990, EFF actively encourages and challenges industry and
   government to support free expression, privacy, and openness in the
   information society. EFF is a member-supported organization and
   maintains one of the most linked-to websites in the world:

   Special thanks to Kathleen Hunt for contributing to this media

                                  - end -

EFF Housewarming Party and BayFF at our New Location on Shotwell Street -
Tuesday, July 10th

  Come Celebrate Our 11th Anniversary, See Our New Home, Enjoy Live Music, and
  Learn More About the Work We Do

     WHAT: EFF's Housewarming "BayFF"
     WHEN: Tuesday, July 10th, 2001 at 7:00 PM Pacific Time
     WHERE: Electronic Frontier Foundation
     454 Shotwell Street
     San Francisco, CA 94110

   This is a night to celebrate! July 10th is:
     * EFF's eleventh birthday
     * The one year anniversary of BayFF's exciting re-launch
     * EFF's formal welcome of the public to our new home

   This event is free and open to the general public. There will be
   plenty of food, drink, music, live music, and good company, including
   EFF co-founder John Perry Barlow.

   The Electronic Frontier Foundation ( ) is the
   leading civil liberties organization working to protect rights in the
   digital world. For more information, please see EFF's website.

   An RSVP is appreciated. Please contact: Katina Bishop - +1
   415-436-9333 x101 -

                                  - end -

Help Working Assets Donate to EFF

   For those of you who are Working Assets Long Distance customers, you
   may be getting a piece of mail this week that lets you designate a
   nonprofit for Working Assets to send $25 to. It doesn't cost you
   anything, ALL nonprofits are qualified, and EFF will get $25 for each
   person who wrote in their info. Please spread the word!

   All you have to do is:
    1. Write in the following info on the short form sent by Working
         Group Name: Electronic Frontier Foundation
         Contact Name: Katie Lucas
         Phone: 415-436-9333 ext 104
         Group Address: 454 Shotwell Street, San Francisco, CA 94110
    2. Mail it in with your next bill payment. It has to be *received* by
       JULY 15, 2001.

   Thank you in advance from everyone at EFF!

                                  - end -

CHIPA: The Talk of the Librarian Conference

   Expressing frustration with the inadequacy of Internet blocking
   mechanisms, librarians swarmed four conference sessions focused on the
   Children's Internet Protection Act (CHIPA or CIPA) at the American
   Library Association (ALA) conference June 16-18 in San Francisco.

   Traveling to the conference from the heartland, many librarians
   clearly had CHIPA on their minds, which was not surprising given the
   Federal Communications Commission (FCC) July 1, 2001, deadline for
   "undertaking to comply" with CHIPA.

   The CHIPA law, or more precisely a combination of the laws called
   CHIPA and another called the Neighborhood Children's Internet
   Protection Act (NCIPA), affects funds allocated through the Library
   Services and Technology Act (LSTA), Title III of the Elementary and
   Secondary Education Act, and the Universal Service discount program
   known as E-Rate (Public Law 106-554).

  Undertaking to Comply

   According to Marc Seifert, Deputy Chief of the Common Carrier Bureau
   of the FCC, and according to FCC rules, "undertaking to comply" may
   refer to a variety of actions, such as educational efforts, attending
   conferences, such as the ALA conference sessions about CHIPA, giving
   notice for and holding public hearings on the issue, and not
   necessarily purchase orders for Internet blocking devices. Seifert
   confirmed that "participants in E-Rate have a one year grace period"
   and that the law requires no library to actually install Internet
   blocking software until July 1, 2002, for the FCC-administered E-Rate
   program, and that libraries who "undertake to comply" prior to July 1,
   2002, may later lawfully refuse to install Internet blocking software
   and refuse to participate in the E-Rate program starting July 1, 2002.

   Seifert mentioned one valid exception: libraries that have to operate
   under state or local procurement laws that would prevent completion of
   purchase of the technology protection measure by the program deadline.
   At one session, an audience member wondered what would happen if the
   state or local procurement law included requirements that any software
   purchased be "effective", in which case no software could effectively
   comply with CHIPA requirements to block obscene, child pornographic,
   and for minors only, harmful to minors content, since none of the
   products even certify to CHIPA compliance. Would such a procurement
   policy provide a permanent exemption to CHIPA requirements? No clear
   answer was forthcoming on this question.

   Tom Sussman, an attorney from Ropes & Gray Law, explained in detail
   what libraries need to do between now and October 28, 2001, to comply
   with the law. He divided libraries into three classes: those that
   receive E-Rate and LSTA funding, those that receive only LSTA funding,
   and those that receive neither E-Rate nor LSTA funding. The E-Rate and
   LSTA funding pertinent to CHIPA consists of grants and discounts on
   Internet services and related equipment.

   The law requires the first class of libraries to an Internet safety
   policy developed pursuant to a public hearing. The policy has to
   address a list of things required by the statute, such as access by
   minors to inappropriate matter on the Internet, safety and security
   when minors use e-mail, chat, and other Internet services,
   unauthorized access by minors, unauthorized disclosure of personal
   identification information of minors, and measures designed to
   restrict access of minors to harmful materials. In addition, libraries
   must implement and enforce a "technology protection" measure,
   ostensibly Internet blocking software, and to certify to the FCC that
   the policy is in place.

   Libraries participating only in the LSTA program need not certify with
   the FCC or install blocking software. These libraries are required
   only to create an Internet safety policy based on public hearings.

   Sussman also opined, "They [Congress] passed a law that was badly
   written, not well-considered and motivated by an election year, and it
   stinks. That's my considered legal opinion. It's a long-standing
   tenant of interpretation is that Congress is presumed to be rational."

  The Antidote to Excess Access

   One session focused on librarian response to criticisms of library
   policies opposing Internet blocking. Participants viewed a video
   called "Excess Access" prepared by the American Family Association
   (AFA), which portrayed a balding middle-aged man viewing what appeared
   to be heterosexual pornography on a library Internet terminal, then
   apparently molesting a teenage boy in the library's restroom.

   Footage of Jonathan Katz' "Gay American History" was shown as the kind
   of book that libraries should not permit in their collections.

   The film criticized the ALA's Library Bill of Rights and portrayed a
   parent complaining to a librarian, who said that her hands were tied
   due to the ALA's policies, implying that library policies are dictated
   by the national organization, rather than by a local library board.

   Following the film, Pat Schuman, President Elect of the ALA,
   facilitated a roleplay session for librarians to practice handling the
   tough questions they receive from the right-wing religious and
   political extremists about library policies and practices related to
   Internet use. Some bemoaned the harassment activities that take place
   among a very small minority of library patrons, but reported that the
   Internet seems to have had little effect on frequency of such
   activity, which has apparently has occurred as long as libraries have
   been around.

   David Burt, Market Researcher for Internet blocking software company
   N2H2, was featured in "Excess Access", which is available from the
   American Family Association website or by calling +1 662-844-5036.
   Some librarians commented that they are using the video as an
   educational tool about the threats to library autonomy and freedom
   to read.

  Librarians on the Front Lines

   Librarians who attended any of the ALA CHIPA sessions received a
   certificate of attendance which could be used as part of CHIPA
   compliance certification.

   The librarians are really on the front lines of the struggle over
   Internet censorship in libraries, so it was heartening to see the
   support they gave each other in handling a difficult issue.

   Judith Krug, Director of the ALA's Office of Intellectual Freedom,
   commented that "libraries are one of the most popular, if not the most
   popular institution in the community." She announced that the ALA has
   raised over $600,000 toward the $1.3 to $1.5 million ALA plans to
   raise for the CHIPA legal challenge.

   Daniel Mach, member of ALA's Jenner & Block legal team, provided
   information at the conference sessions about the legal challenges to
   CHIPA filed by the ALA, the ACLU, and other organizations like EFF, on
   March 20, 2001. A special three-judge district court in Philadelphia
   will hear the challenges with any appeals going directly to the
   Supreme Court, as provided by the legislation.

  Latebreaking News

   After the ALA conference ended, EFF learned that the legal challenges
   against CHIPA filed by the American Library Association and the
   American Civil Liberties Union, along with help from EFF and other
   organizations, are scheduled to go to trial on February 14, 2002,
   under the name ALA v. United States.

   Please see the Newsbytes article below for more information:


   For more information on the CHIPA legal challenge:

   For the American Library Association resources on CHIPA:

   For more information on opposing online censorship:

                                  - end -

EFF-Recommended Reading: Heins's Not in Front of the Children

   The latest book from Marjorie Heins, entitled Not in Front of the
   Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth (ISBN:
   0-374-17545-4), is an indispensible resource for EFF members or anyone
   concerned about issues of censorship, obscenity, and harmful to minors
   content in any era. Heins, who currently works on the Free Expression
   Policy Project at the National Coalition Against Censorship, traces
   with insight historical trends and their relevance to today's
   struggles over censorship on behalf of children.

   From Huckleberry Finn to Harry Potter, from Internet blocking /
   censorware to the V-chip, censorship exercised on behalf of children
   and adolescents is often based on the assumption that they must be
   protected from "indecent" information that might harm their
   development -- whether in art, in literature, or on a website. But
   where does this assumption come from, and is it true?

   In Not in Front of the Children, Marjorie Heins explores the
   fascinating history of "indecency" laws and other restrictions aimed
   at protecting youth. From Plato's argument for rigid censorship,
   through Victorian laws aimed at repressing libidinous thoughts, to
   contemporary battles over sex education in public schools and violence
   in the media, Heins guides us through what became, and remains, an
   ideological minefield. With examples drawn from around the globe, she
   suggests that the "harm to minors" argument rests on shaky

   There is an urgent need for informed, dispassionate debate about the
   perceived conflict between the free-expression rights of young people
   and the widespread urge to shield them from expression that is
   considered harmful. Not in Front of the Children will spur this
   long-needed conversation.

   For an excerpt from the book, see:

   Prior to working at NCAC, Marjorie Heins served as an attorney at the
   American Civil Liberties Union. She is also the author of Sex, Sin,
   and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars.


Thank you to EFF Volunteer Michael Mathews

   The Electronic Frontier Foundation would like to thank Michael Mathews
   for his software dontation to us. Michael wrote a great little utility
   called Quickmirror that we use to back up important directories on our
   Windows computers to our Linux server running Samba. It works great
   and we really appreciate it. Thank you Michael.

     Author name: Michael Mathews
     Author e-mail address:

                                  - end -

Pretrial Appeal of Anonymous Speech Victory Denied

   EFF won another victory in our fight to protect anonymous Internet
   speech last week when the Ninth Circuit denied 2TheMart's petition to
   take an interlocutory (pretrial) appeal of a lower court decision
   quashing a subpoena requesting the identity of posters on an Internet
   message board. This means that the district court's opinion protecting
   the anonymous posters against disclosure of their identity stands.

   The decision was the first in the country to address the standard for
   compliance with a subpoena where the "J. Doe" (who used the pseudonym
   NoGuano) was not a party to the case, and no allegations of liability
   against Doe had been made. The court held that the identities would
   not be turned over unless (1) the subpoena was issued in good faith
   and not for any improper purpose; (2) the information sought relates
   to a core claim or defense; (3)the identifying information is directly
   and materially relevant to that core or defense; and (4) information
   sufficient to establish or disprove that claim or defense is
   unavailable from any other source.

   More information on the case can be found at:
   The cite for the case is: John Doe v. Inc., 140 F. Supp.
   2d 1088, 1092 n.2 (W.D. Wash 2001)

                                  - end -


   EFFector is published by:

   The Electronic Frontier Foundation
   454 Shotwell Street
   San Francisco CA 94110-1914 USA
   +1 415 436 9333 (voice)
   +1 415 436 9993 (fax)

   Katina Bishop, EFF Education & Offline Activism Director
   Stanton McCandlish, EFF Technical Director/Webmaster

   To Join EFF online, or make an additional donation, go to:

   Membership & donation queries:
   General EFF, legal, policy or online resources queries:

   Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged.
   Signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of EFF. To
   reproduce signed articles individually, please contact the authors for
   their express permission. Press releases and EFF announcements &
   articles may be reproduced individually at will.

   To subscribe to EFFector via e-mail, send to a
   message BODY (not subject) of:
    subscribe effector
   The list server will send you a confirmation code and then add you to
   a subscription list for EFFector (after you return the confirmation
   code; instructions will be in the confirmation e-mail).

   To unsubscribe, send a similar message body to the same address, like
    unsubscribe effector

   (Please ask"> to manually add you
   to or remove you from the list if this does not work for you for some

   To change your address, send both commands at once, one per line
   (i.e., unsubscribe your old address, and subscribe your new address).

   Back issues are available at:

   To get the latest issue, send any message to (or, and it will be mailed to
   you automagically. You can also get, via the Web:

                                  - end -

Back to top

JavaScript license information