Crude screening by searching for words (like "breast") is not advisable,
however, I believe the "Cyberpatrol" software is put out and updated by a
group that actually looks at individual websites so that the incidental use
of sexual words won't trigger exclusion. (You'd get the Starr report); but
the purely prurient sites (adult material) are kept away from your immature
employees. Cyberpatrol.com
Michael J. Lynch
Law Library Director (404) 872-3593 ext. 108
John Marshall Law School
1422 West Peachtree St. N.W. FAX (404) 873-3802
Atlanta, GA 30309
lynchm@johnmarshall.edu
> ----------
> From: Ellen M. Poler[SMTP:epoler@interaccess.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 1998 3:04 PM
> To: Karen Mahnk
> Cc: Hill, Byron C.; 'law-lib@ucdavis.edu'
> Subject: Re: LAW FIRM LIBRARIANS -- INTERNET SCREENING
>
> Karen:
>
> I agree with you.
>
> Something that often strikes me: "Bad" material doesn't come up in most
> searches. You really have to go looking for it. I recall only once
> hitting an "undesirable" site when doing a search that had no sexual
> content whatsoever.
>
> There are plenty of objectionable sites.
>
> As a parent, and as a lawyer, I'm a first amendment absolutist; I
> decided a long time ago that the value of "free inquiry" was much more
> important for my children than restricting their Internet access. (Of
> course, once, a few years ago, before the Web, there was an academic
> disclipine case at the University of Michigan; a male student wrote a
> story that used a female student's name, in violation of the code of
> conduct. I was curious what he wrote, because it involved the use of the
> name of one of the first English-language novels, and I had one heck of
> a time finding what he wrote -- my children had to show me how!)
>
> Most of the objectionable material I have seen is pretty boring to me.
>
> Also, if many people use other search engines for their first pass at
> finding things, they're not going to find undesirable sites by clicking
> on "travel" or "law." There is no doubt that objectionable material is
> there, and if you search for "sex," I suppose you'll get the bad with
> the good.
>
> > I believe filtering is a bad idea for several reasons:
> > First, filtering devices are far from accurate - &
> > W/i the legal field there is often a need for a wide range of
> > information depending upon the particular client/case.
> > Filters have been known to limit such searches as "breast" which
> > would cause some difficulty in searching for data re: breast cancer.
>
> I guess some people really are that simplistic.
> > By the same token, many undesirable sites have made adjustments to
> > circumvent such filters ie.(whitehouse.com).
> > Filters may be helpful to some extent on the children's computer but
> > for obtaining any/all info avail. on the`net - for complete
> > researching,
> > it's a bad idea, IMHO.
> > Karen Mahnk
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Karen Mahnk, Research Librarian (305)545-1889 FAX:
> > (305)545-1972
> > State of Florida Public Defender, karenpdo@pop.gate.net
> > 11th Judicial Circuit
> > 1320 NW 14th Street, Suite 313
> > Miami, Fl.,33125
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > At 08:22 AM 10/28/1998 -0500, Hill, Byron C. wrote:
> > >
> > >A colleague reports that her firm will shortly be making Internet
> > access
> > >available to all attorneys, paralegals, librarians and
> > administrators.
> > >However, they are considering the inclusion of a filtering device
> > that will
> > >block access to "inappropriate" sites (pornographic, entertainment,
> > sports,
> > >shopping, etc.). Has your firm considered or implemented such a
> > device?
> > >Individual sites may be "unblocked" upon request to Information
> > Services.
> > >Thoughts? Comments?
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ~~
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Karen Mahnk, Research Librarian (305)545-1889 FAX
> > (305)545-1972
> > State of Florida Public Defender,
> > karenpdo@pop.gate.net
> > 11th Judicial Circuit
> > 1320 NW 14th Street, Suite 313
> > Miami, Fl.,33125
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ~~
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> --
> ============================================================
> Ellen M. Poler epoler@interaccess.com
> McBreen, McBreen & Kopko 312-332-6405 X 240
> 20 North Wacker Drive FAX: 312-332-2657
> Chicago IL 60606
> ============================================================
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:49:59 PST