<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Free Speech and Censorship in Online Communities</title>
	<link>http://www.thevirtualhandshake.com/blog/2007/01/02/free-speech-and-censorship-in-online-communities</link>
	<description>Blogs, social network sites, social software---and how to use all of these tools to become dramatically more successful</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:27:33 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jennifer Cannon</title>
		<link>http://www.thevirtualhandshake.com/blog/2007/01/02/free-speech-and-censorship-in-online-communities#comment-116883</link>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer Cannon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 19:55:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.thevirtualhandshake.com/blog/2007/01/02/free-speech-and-censorship-in-online-communities#comment-116883</guid>
		<description>The links for the above comment did not show...here they are again. 

November 20, 2006 

California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Free Speech on the Internet 
Read the full article here: http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2006_11.php#005017

Read this page...its good!
http://www.eff.org/Censorship/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The links for the above comment did not show&#8230;here they are again. </p>
<p>November 20, 2006 </p>
<p>California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Free Speech on the Internet<br />
Read the full article here: <a href="http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2006_11.php#005017" rel="nofollow">http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2006_11.php#005017</a></p>
<p>Read this page&#8230;its good!<br />
<a href="http://www.eff.org/Censorship/" rel="nofollow">http://www.eff.org/Censorship/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jennifer Cannon</title>
		<link>http://www.thevirtualhandshake.com/blog/2007/01/02/free-speech-and-censorship-in-online-communities#comment-116866</link>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer Cannon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 19:52:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.thevirtualhandshake.com/blog/2007/01/02/free-speech-and-censorship-in-online-communities#comment-116866</guid>
		<description>THE FUTURE OF FREE SPEECH ON THE INTERNET IS AGAIN AT RISK: HOUSE COMMERCE COMMITTEE TO VOTE ON CENSORSHIP BILL 

This is brought to you by the Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition and the Center for Democracy and Technology. 

A little more than a year after the Supreme Court struck down Congress' last attempt to censor the Net, it's deja vu all over again -- a Congressional committee is poised to vote on a bill that threatens to chill free speech on the Internet. Like the unconstitutional Communications Decency Act, the Child Online Protection Act (HR 3783), sponsored by Rep. Michael Oxley (R-OH,) is offered in the name of protecting children from harmful content online. 

______________________________________________________ 
November 20, 2006 

California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Free Speech on the Internet 

San Francisco - In what is a victory for free speech on the Internet, the California Supreme Court ruled today that no provider or user of an interactive computer service may be held liable for putting material on the Internet that was written by someone else. In doing so, the Court overruled an earlier decision by the Court of Appeal. 

Today's ruling affirms that blogs, websites, listservs, and ISPs like Yahoo!, as well as individuals like defendant Ilena Rosenthal, are protected under Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act (CDA), which explicitly states that "[n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider." 

Read the full case here: 

_____________________________________________________ 

Here is an interesting page on this subject: 

Censorship and the Internet 

Jennifer Cannon
CEO/Founder/Owner: www.BusinessIIBusiness.com (Business Owner Networking)
CEO/Owner: www.LegnaMarketing.com (E-News &#38; Promotional Marketing)
Leader/Moderator: BusinessIIBusiness Owners Network Ryze</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>THE FUTURE OF FREE SPEECH ON THE INTERNET IS AGAIN AT RISK: HOUSE COMMERCE COMMITTEE TO VOTE ON CENSORSHIP BILL </p>
<p>This is brought to you by the Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition and the Center for Democracy and Technology. </p>
<p>A little more than a year after the Supreme Court struck down Congress&#8217; last attempt to censor the Net, it&#8217;s deja vu all over again &#8212; a Congressional committee is poised to vote on a bill that threatens to chill free speech on the Internet. Like the unconstitutional Communications Decency Act, the Child Online Protection Act (HR 3783), sponsored by Rep. Michael Oxley (R-OH,) is offered in the name of protecting children from harmful content online. </p>
<p>______________________________________________________<br />
November 20, 2006 </p>
<p>California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Free Speech on the Internet </p>
<p>San Francisco - In what is a victory for free speech on the Internet, the California Supreme Court ruled today that no provider or user of an interactive computer service may be held liable for putting material on the Internet that was written by someone else. In doing so, the Court overruled an earlier decision by the Court of Appeal. </p>
<p>Today&#8217;s ruling affirms that blogs, websites, listservs, and ISPs like Yahoo!, as well as individuals like defendant Ilena Rosenthal, are protected under Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act (CDA), which explicitly states that &#8220;[n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.&#8221; </p>
<p>Read the full case here: </p>
<p>_____________________________________________________ </p>
<p>Here is an interesting page on this subject: </p>
<p>Censorship and the Internet </p>
<p>Jennifer Cannon<br />
CEO/Founder/Owner: <a href="http://www.BusinessIIBusiness.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.BusinessIIBusiness.com</a> (Business Owner Networking)<br />
CEO/Owner: <a href="http://www.LegnaMarketing.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.LegnaMarketing.com</a> (E-News &amp; Promotional Marketing)<br />
Leader/Moderator: BusinessIIBusiness Owners Network Ryze</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Walter Paul Bebirian</title>
		<link>http://www.thevirtualhandshake.com/blog/2007/01/02/free-speech-and-censorship-in-online-communities#comment-109656</link>
		<dc:creator>Walter Paul Bebirian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jan 2007 19:42:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.thevirtualhandshake.com/blog/2007/01/02/free-speech-and-censorship-in-online-communities#comment-109656</guid>
		<description>Ahhhh - free speech 

as well as to speak 

or not to speak 

that is the question - 

and then web site - 

blog 

or forum - 

Well, to speak here or not on the particular topic is a freedom that I am allowed as a member

To express an opinion that may differ or contradict or even portray a different perspective is definitely a freedom 

to interrupt with a different topic

or a profanity or some other innaporopriate distraction from a discussion 
those would be rude

and to argue or fight with a person either as the originator of a topic blasting a person with a differing viewpoint or as a commentor blasting the originator of a topic - well - that wouldn't do under any circumstance

however there is a fine point of distinction that gets untroduced online which is not the same as it might be off line or in the non virtual world - and that lies in the interpretation of a person's intent when actually hearing their voice - 

I believe that often some of the issues or conflicts that people may be having with others stems from an innability to hear the other person's tone of voice and instead what might be happening - well they just might be injecting the tone of their thoughts or their fears or for whatever reason misinterpreting what it is that another might be attempting to convey - 

It is a fact - that relatively speaking - writing and expressing thoughts in the manner in which it is done on the Internet whether on a web site -a blog or in a forum is a relatively new phenomenon in the long history of human communication (including the art of writing letters and business communications and public realtions) and the extent to which this art is mastered by each individual that is attempting to utilize this medium to convey or get across their ideas to others varies greatly with the extent to which they have mastered the new skill.

Were there classes or courses to teach people various skills in this art - then perhaps there might be better communications in the various arenas where this skill must be utilized - 

Otherwise the learning is to be left up to those doing the doing -

thank you!

Walter</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ahhhh - free speech </p>
<p>as well as to speak </p>
<p>or not to speak </p>
<p>that is the question - </p>
<p>and then web site - </p>
<p>blog </p>
<p>or forum - </p>
<p>Well, to speak here or not on the particular topic is a freedom that I am allowed as a member</p>
<p>To express an opinion that may differ or contradict or even portray a different perspective is definitely a freedom </p>
<p>to interrupt with a different topic</p>
<p>or a profanity or some other innaporopriate distraction from a discussion<br />
those would be rude</p>
<p>and to argue or fight with a person either as the originator of a topic blasting a person with a differing viewpoint or as a commentor blasting the originator of a topic - well - that wouldn&#8217;t do under any circumstance</p>
<p>however there is a fine point of distinction that gets untroduced online which is not the same as it might be off line or in the non virtual world - and that lies in the interpretation of a person&#8217;s intent when actually hearing their voice - </p>
<p>I believe that often some of the issues or conflicts that people may be having with others stems from an innability to hear the other person&#8217;s tone of voice and instead what might be happening - well they just might be injecting the tone of their thoughts or their fears or for whatever reason misinterpreting what it is that another might be attempting to convey - </p>
<p>It is a fact - that relatively speaking - writing and expressing thoughts in the manner in which it is done on the Internet whether on a web site -a blog or in a forum is a relatively new phenomenon in the long history of human communication (including the art of writing letters and business communications and public realtions) and the extent to which this art is mastered by each individual that is attempting to utilize this medium to convey or get across their ideas to others varies greatly with the extent to which they have mastered the new skill.</p>
<p>Were there classes or courses to teach people various skills in this art - then perhaps there might be better communications in the various arenas where this skill must be utilized - </p>
<p>Otherwise the learning is to be left up to those doing the doing -</p>
<p>thank you!</p>
<p>Walter</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
