A state judge in California dismissed a suit filed by a Livermore mother against the local public library. She filed the suit after she discovered her 12-year-old son had downloaded pornographic images off the Internet with the library computer. \n In Kathleen R. v. City of Livermore, the mother claimed that, by not installing filtering software, the library had created a public nuisance and was wasting public funds. She asked for an injunction to stop the library from letting anyone go anywhere on the Internet. \n The city attorney who defended the library argued that the Communications Decency Act of 1996, a federal law, says the library can not be held responsible for material provided by a third party. Although parts of the law were declared unconstitutional in 1997, other parts were allowed to stand. A part still in effect says the provider of a computer can't be treated as a publisher of materials on the Internet and that state or local law that says otherwise won't be enforced. \n California Superior Court Judge George Hernandez said that law prevents public libraries from being sued for failing to install filters. \n Friends of filtering say the fight is far from finished. "I think the judge was definitely legally in error," Michael Millen, the mother's lawyer, told a reporter. "They certainly have won round one of probably what's a three- or four-round battle." He said the federal law cited by the judge has no bearing on lawsuits based on obscenity. \n David Burt, president of Filtering Facts, an advocate for filters, said he didn't think Congress intended to allow children to see porn in their libraries. He called the decision "outrageous" but said it could lead to the passage of more laws that require schools and libraries to install filters. \n A lawyer with People for the American Way said the idea of requiring libraries to filter out information is outrageous. The organization, as well as the American Civil Liberties Union, filed a brief on behalf of the city. Larry Ottinger of People for the American Way called legislation to require filters a "waste of money" and a "travesty." \n The mother could appeal the decision to a higher state court or come back with a new state that claims the library violated federal laws and not state laws. A decision on whether an appeal or a new suit will be filed has not been announced.
All models were at least 18 years old at the time of their performance. 18 U.S.C. 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements Compliance Statement.
