|
Tickler, ISP level blocking would very likely get a very strong court challenge. Blocking legal material would be a very risky way to do business. I think that some companies in New Zealand or somewhere in that area have tried to do it, but it makes surfing very slow (each page has to get processed by the system before it goes to you... a real big buffer!).
Any attempts by an ISP to block adult material (especially if that ISP is the only company providing DSL or cable access in an area) would lead to an instant and very strong court challenge, and the ISP would likely back down. It would be the first step on a slippery slope of blocking other objectionable sites like abortion, birth control, muslim sites, anything that says bad things against the US, etc. The Surpreme Court doesn't love porn, but they could easily sniff out the implications.
Filtering has to be an individual end user computer making decisions based on the settings made by the owner of that computer. In the same way that TV's can block out adult material (VChip style), the internet would be good going down that sort of road.
Bill, as for "text only" unranked, I think that adult keywords are still adult material. You couldn't have a page filled with "MILFs sucking cock and getting fucked in the ass" and consider it to be anything other than adult. It wouldn't be just about the images, more the content as whole.
Alex
|