In 1996 the Communication Decency Act (CDA) provided websites protection. Public servers were set out to encourage success of the internet as a marketplace, 230 section of the communications decency act wanted to keep the government involvement to a minimum. Originally, section 230 of the CDA was created to protect children online from sexual mistreatment (Asencion, 2017). The CDA came into play in the 1990’s, around the same time that the internet became big (Halverson, 2018).
Since the 1990’s courts have dealt with being accused of being responsible for the internet service provider for the content that is displayed on its platform. Requirement that must be met in order for the courts to provide protection to Internet service providers were the service provider is obligated to allow access by a number of users to a computer server (Asencion, 2017). When public use of the internet began to become enlarged, the CDA was passed. The CDA provided sections that pertained to the internet, which some made an effort to have control over the sexually explicit content on the internet, which was section 223.
Section 230 still only became a safe place for the internet providers (Halverson, 2018). Most of the allowance concerning the CDA has its attention on the scope and application of section 230 protection from the public obligations, this normally concerned defamation cases. The CDA main goal was to protect underage children from being explicit content online. Confirmatory defenses were provided by the CDA to correct the concerns about the accountability for the internet industry (Halverston, 2018).
127 our experts are availableright now
In the year of 2007, websites were reported by adults such as craigslist, that particular percentage rose to 53% in 2010 and particular sections of the websites included adult content and dating, this website gave individuals permission to display advertisements that offered and also requested sexual services (Asencion, 2017). Many courts have acted as protectors of section 230 of the CDA. Courts who are all for the section 230 has said that the protection encourages free speech, mostly in online public media.
There is also controversy that the section 230 is important because websites cannot be projected to having the dimensions to look after every third-party content that is uploaded on their sites (Halverson, 2018). Even though section 230 was not created to start any protection, courts have worked hard, and failed to settle models from the earlier internet era with the realism of oppression. The ending results of the actions have been victims of sex traffickers unable to continue any cases with the businesses that enable sex trafficking (Heil, 2017). After the adding of section 230 some plaintiffs questioned the constitutionality of parts of section 223 (Halverson, 2018).
Problems That Necessitate the Policy
Even though the criminal law exists and cases have been brought against the internet service provider for inappropriate information that is on their websites. One website that has been under fire for the content that is on their website is back page, which is facing criminal charges. There has been a number of failed attempts to put Back page to an end and hold them accountable for their content (Maras, 2017). However, after all the commotion behind Back Page and its exploitation of minors, Back Page thought it would be great to contribute money to the Children of the Night foundation, but this will not help return the missing children due to trafficking or heal the hurt that the victims and the family members of the victims feel.
If this certain website is held accountable for the content on their site then it will be known as an “information content provider” under the 230 section of the CDA (Maras, 2017). Over the world, section 230 of the CDA was originally set out to protect children in the world and the courts have safeguarded commercial exploiters of children and adults (Halverson, 2018). The section 230 of the CDA’s protection set off disagreement from the beginning and set the platform for the steady debates regarding the pressure between unregulated free speech and online safety (Halverson, 2018).
Section 230 of the CDA is responsible for the development of the internet. Others say that the internet is very much so not what it should be, regardless it comes to sex trafficking of children and women and pornography of children (Cardenas, 2000). Human trafficking has grown fast over the years and forty million people in the world have became victims of human trafficking estimated by the International Labour Organization. With so much exploitation of modern-day slavery, sadly, 25% of the victims are children (Hiel, 2018).
There has been request for the congress to upgrade the 230 section of the CDA and address the problems that have occurred because of it. Since the internet is evolving, many traffickers find their victims on the internet, it has become so much easier to capture victims for sex trafficking, especially children, other than catching victims on the streets and in public areas like it has been done in the past (Asencion, 2017). Instead of the internet service providers been punished for the content that is being placed on their websites, instead the individuals who post the inappropriate material on the sites are being punished. The CDA is the reason for the internet being a place for individuals to come to find victims of human trafficking (Asencion, 2017).
Th online classified website Craigslist was sued by the Sheriff of Cook County and claimed that it was an irritation and the website was the blame for the solicitation of prostitution but unfortunately the lawsuit was dismissed and pressure was not put on any websites for the content that was displayed (Asencion, 2017). It was demanded that their adult section be removed from their platform, and it was removed. Unfortunately, after Craigslist was removed, Back page was created, users from Craigslist moved to Back page and continued to advertise sex online. CDA section 230 made sure that Back page did not pursue any trafficking of children on their website (Asencion, 2017). Titles are use to target minors to be sold for sex, cases of trafficking minors on the websites are being thrown out. The CDA used as a protection to what is happening on the websites today. The website Back page is hiding behind the CDA and continue to be protected if the courts and congress never say differently. (Asencion, 2017).
Some federal officials have referred the CDA as the “Communication Indecency Act” because the CDA treats classified websites how common phone carriers are treated. Officials are trusting these websites to review all the content that is placed o their platforms, which should not happen because it only increases the human trafficking of young individuals (Asencion, 2017). Advocates of unrestrictive internet debate that if individuals who are using the website were no longer protected by the CDA, the harming of freedom of speech because others would try to put the websites to an end (Cardenas, 2000). Researchers express that the first amendment should not be used as a safe gate to cover the illegal content that is being portrayed on the internet. Children suffer from long-term injuries from trafficking and no one in the higher power is doing anything about it (Asencion, 2017).
Even today, the united states have a non-existence of landmark cases against the websites for being the servers to give third parties permission to post ads on their platform for sexual services from individuals. Now that perpetrators are able to use the internet to promote and advertise sex trafficking it has become more easier to find victims.
Policy Description
The Communication Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 gave protection to many websites for inappropriate acts that are committed on their websites by other operators. For this act to fall through, Section 509 of the CDA is stated that platforms cannot be treated as the producer of any information provided by another information content provider (2000). Section 230 was intended for cases of internet sexual exploitation. The CDA was created to protect children online, the courts have understood the CDA to give owners of websites that are using their website to exploit children the and adults the safe guard. The courts have taken the CDA and have been very unreliable with it, many believe that the way to avoid de facto judgement of websites that openly use their way to abduct children and adults for sex would be to adjust the CDA (Halverson, 2018).
Congress have attempted delete the online websites that advertise such unsuitable material on their websites but the First Amendment has kept this from happening (Cardenas, 2000). One section of the policy recapitulates the CDA and the First Amendment, another section discusses the non-authorization of select states to fight against online child trafficking ads, and the last section outlines the recent argument on ending sex trafficking of children on the internet (Cardenas, 2000). The internet has been given the chance to purchase, trade, and post their views, thoughts, and feelings without being held accountable for the content that the third party is posting (Cardenas, 2000). Even though the CDA eliminates publishers of inappropriate content on owners platforms, there is still a split decision between whether or not the protection would be prevented to which the First Amendment defends the sites from. The third part of the CDA assesses the strong point of the officials right to indict any website under opposing trafficking laws. Due to the upsurge and enlargement of websites in the world, a huge total of internet access has set out to expose traffickers using websites and ads to upload sufferers of trafficking.
Policy Analysis
Congress passed the CDA to bring up-to-date the larger Telecommunications Act of 1934, the CDA aimed to incentivize the internet. This was to give control over what is seen by minors on the internet. The was created reply to the result in which someone was held responsible for wrongful and slanders were posted by others about a safety firm. Another popular search site that the section 230 of the CDA protects is Google, Google is not held accountable for any slander when someone’s name is searched on their platform. They way that the law is applied is firmly up to the courts, the branches are there to only interpret the law. Courts are finding the websites that are known to have sexual exploitation on them free of any criminal liability to any individual that is a victim of the horrible crimes of trafficking. The CDA must be broken down and thoroughly looked at to find out ways to end trafficking so that problems of sexual trafficking on sites can cease.
Monitoring of the sites should be in place more by the law officials and courts, also, consequences of the trafficking should be taken more seriously. Until this is in place, the CDA and world of trafficking will remain the same. Harsher sentencing to the perpetrators would be a great start to stop trafficking, there should be support from the courts and Congress with the hospitals and the govern of the classified websites should also cease. The financial help to local law enforcement would help also and the employment of new workers. By taking some strength from section 230 of the CDA, it may help the individuals who have dealt with sex trafficking find compensation being exposed on websites for sex and treated as property that can be bought and sold. An idea to help amend the CDA is Digital Millennium Copyright Act, this method would incentivize website owners to do away with advertisements that bargain sex with minors. Many of these websites have postings of minors that are specifically classifying minors are being sold for sex. Articles titles are labeled as “barely legal” or “out of college” when traffickers are looking to find minors to be trafficked.
Many inquiries about the span of the understanding of section 230, they argue about the level of accountability for interactive computer services. Websites today apparently do not responsibility to the content on their forums. However, in early 2018, the CDA had been revised by H.R. 1865 which joined a House of Representative’s bill with the Senate. Laws were later signed in by the 45th president and stated that the CDA was not in play to bring protection to websites that sponsored ads for trafficking (Halverson, 2018).
