With the debate forming about the Community Decency Act, we must all
consider the issue of librarian's liability under the act. This has been a
hot topic, but the issue of librarian's liability is especially troubling.
We need to remember that some of the greatest works of literature have been
banned, have had attempts to be banned, or have been challenged as indecent.
This includes THE WIZARD OF OZ (promotes witchcraft), the JEFFERSONIAN BIBLE
(promotes "godlessness"), HUCKLEBERRY FINN, LOLITA, works by Maya Angeleu
(incensitive to african-americans!), and many other standard books. Even
the Bible itself has been challenged as being indecent.
This legislation is very troubling, both because of its overt restrictions
on free speech, but also because of the "community standard" issue. What
community? Who determines the standard? If the most restrictive community
statndard is used, then some of the works named above might be banned.
What does this do to the fabled "Information Superhighway?"
Librarians, publishers, and others who make the content available are in
fact liable under this act. I know that the law exempts those who simply
make the facilities available, without excercising any control, but when
librarians provide reference assistance to users of the internet, they are
in fact doing more than making these facilities available.
Right now, my library has two public access terminals for the world wide web
and internet. When I train a patron to use this terminal, I believe that
this is enough more than just providing the equipment to make me liable if
the user accesses something that is concidered "indecent."
One example of a reference database that contains words that may be found
"indecent" under "community standards" is the WEBSTER'S
DICTIONARY--HYPERTEXT EDITION, located at
HTTE://WWW.REFDESK.COM/FACTS.HTML#DICT. In the 19th century, there was a
criminal case involving "The word that no Christian man dare speak." In
that case, the offense was so egregious that the word itself could not be
stated in the text of the law and was thus "indecent." This word was
definitely a breach of the community standards. The word was "Cunnilingus."
This word is found in many standard dictionaries that are available to the
public in libraries, including BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY and THE AMERICAN
HERITAGE DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. No one would deny a librarian
the right to help a student look this word up in a dictionary. However, if
the word were looked up ON THE INTERNET, using a dictionary that the
librarian helped to point the student to, this would be "indecent." Under
the law, the publishers of the dictionary AND THE LIBRARIAN WHO HELPED THE
STUDENT FIND IT ON THE INTERNET would both be liable for up to two years in
jail. The student might have this word in a sex-education class, or hear it
used in a PG-13 movie, yet the simple act of looking it up on the computer
is illegal.
There are reasons why the internet needs to be made safe for children.
However, the way to do that is not to invade the free speech of the public,
or to create criminal penalties for the librarians who provide reference
assistance.
**********************************************************************
--Bryan M. Carson, J.D., M.I.L.S.
Assistant Branch Librarian
New York Public Library, Castle Hill Library
PHONE: 718-824-3838 (work) 718-325-9680 (home)
FAX: Same (call first) Same (call first)
E-MAIL: Castle__hill@nypl.org bcarson@cris.com OR
bcarson@mail.concentric.net
"Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves, or
we know where we can find information upon it."
--Samuel Johnson
**********************************************************************
All opinions expressed are my own and not my employer's. All original
content (c) 1996 Bryan M. Carson. All rights reserved.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:49:10 PST