[ale] OT-ish Political: Georgia HB509 Requires Blocking Technology in all Web-Capable Devices

[Scott M. Jones]

Bills in Georgia live for two years.  It looks like this was meant to be
voted on in 2018.  Based on text of the bill, it would require a (state)
constitutional amendment referendum also.  It looks like the plan all
along was to get it passed in 2018 and begin implementation on January
1, 2019.  See section 4 of the bill text.  (So we have a year to fight it.)

-Scott

On 3/14/17 11:04 AM, Scott Plante wrote:
> It would have had to pass the House by crossover day, which has already
> gone by. According to your link it basically was introduced and went
> nowhere. There are a lot of harebrained bills introduced that basically
> just get ignored like this. I wonder how many are by legislators who
> really think they're a good idea and will work, vs how many are just to
> pacify some big supporter with a pet cause.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Scott M. Jones" <eff at dragoncon.org>
> *To: *"Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts" <ale at ale.org>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:47:58 AM
> *Subject: *[ale] OT-ish Political: Georgia HB509 Requires Blocking
> Technology in all Web-Capable Devices
> 
> I found out about this bill in the Georgia House on Sunday night and
> I've been feverishly researching it ever since.  As you may know I've
> been trying to revive Electronic Frontiers Georgia.  It's likely that
> EFGA would work vigorously to oppose this.
> 
> http://www.legis.ga.gov/legislation/en-US/Display/20172018/HB/509
> 
> - Requires blocking technology in all web-enabled devices to block adult
> content and illegal content.
> 
> - Circumvention information is illegal and is to be blocked.
> 
> - An unblocking fee of $20 is required.  This is to be collected to go
> to a state fund.
> 
> - All companies must maintain a call center to adjust the blocking list
> based on reports.  An impossible burden for startups.
> 
> - The state AG will sue to suspend sales of non-compliant devices in the
> state.
> 
> - The bill is named the "Human Trafficking Prevention Act" as if
> blocking will somehow prevent human trafficking.  (Funds collected don't
> even go to this purpose.)
> 
> - No privacy protections for those who willingly pay the fee.  Could
> become a new Scarlett Letter with or without a data breach.
> 
> - Seems like the CDA all over again.
> 
> Articles:
> 
> http://lawnewz.com/crazy/bill-would-require-automatic-blocking-of-child-pornography-and-legal-porn-too/
> 
> https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/03/10/georgia-state-rep-files-bill-to-automatically-censor-internet-content/
> 
> I was in touch with the EFF about this yesterday and it seems there are
> similar bills in other states, so this is a coordinated effort somehow.
> 
> -Scott