Culver City to install filters on its municipal WiFi network

They call Los Angeles the City of Angels. We didn't find it to be that exactly -- particularly when much like anywhere else, folks are accustomed to downloading pr0n and tons of illicit materials on BitTorrent. Fortunately for us, upright citizens of Culver City, an LA suburb, will be installing Net filters (Audible Magic's CopySense Network Appliance, to be specific) on its free WiFi municipal network, which covers 10 square blocks in its downtown area. Sadly funnier still are the hacks at the MPAA who praised the move (but of course), saying that this new filter will "help safeguard system users from being subject to illegal files" -- as if somehow all of these "illegal files" just come raining down out of the sky on innocent folks wanting to read, say, Engadget.

[Via TechDirt]

[p-diddy @ Aug 25th 2006 5:05PM]

Well Cyrus, some the tubes that make up the Internets just lead to empty holes, and yes, rain pr0n upon the innocent. Shows what you know.

-p-

[Hunter @ Aug 25th 2006 5:30PM]

This post reminds me of the Penny Arcade podcast about a kid downloading porn on his PSP at school. The reactionary FOX report they referenced seemed to imply that the porn was being downloaded without invitation from the child, as though anyone connected to a wireless network would automatically download offensive material.

[Gavin @ Aug 25th 2006 6:13PM]

I hate to be the voice of reason, but free is free. You get what you pay for people.

[Andir2.0 @ Aug 25th 2006 6:17PM]

"as though anyone connected to a wireless network would automatically download offensive material."

Yeah! That's how it got there. I'm serious. I was reading the news and BAM! Porn was on my PC.

[mike p @ Aug 25th 2006 6:31PM]

my school blocks engadget :(

[Roy McKEnzie @ Aug 25th 2006 6:31PM]

thank god the government is deciding what is best for me again.

[theinvisiblemooseman @ Aug 25th 2006 6:34PM]

Culver City Is NOT a suburb!

[ideophile @ Aug 25th 2006 6:54PM]

to Roy:

why wouldn't the government, the people who run law enforcement try to stop illegal activity on a service they provide for free?

[The Dude @ Aug 25th 2006 7:36PM]

Hey man, nice Lebowski reference in the opening sentence.

[Steve R @ Aug 25th 2006 8:14PM]

Anyone see hear about the First Amendment? How about a dual layered (or "tubed", if you will) approach whereby the default wi-fi access is filtered, but with certification of being over 18 ("I agree/I was born in " blah blah blah) they get the unfiltered version?

[andars05 @ Aug 25th 2006 8:59PM]

What does the first ammendment have to do with anything?

[Steve R @ Aug 25th 2006 9:48PM]

The First Amendment has everything to do with what's going on. Whenever the government limits speech or restricts access to information, the First Amendment is implicated.

Similar issues are raised when libraries try to filter certain information in their Internet stations.

[andars05 @ Aug 25th 2006 10:41PM]

Thats true, but I don't think its quite the same as if the government mandated privately owned ISPs to filter content. I think its a fine line though. I would have to say technically it is censorship. I don't think pornography should be that readily available to children, but at the same time what will the government decide is "bad" and needs to filtered from the public next.

[Zach Marshall @ Aug 26th 2006 1:34AM]

i think, offensive material, such as p0rn would be fine to block. however, i don't feel its in the interest of the government to stop material like BitTorrent.

Thats the MPAA's job and the RIAA's job.

As someone who is persuing a law degree, i would think that somewhere a fine line thats crossed is present as the government is filtering the users content in a much "China-government" type way. I don't feel that its the government to decide whats lude and vulgar, and what the people should and should not see.

thats what critics of China's Great-Firewall complain about, but yet, its just as if its beginning to happen here.

[paul @ Aug 26th 2006 2:44PM]

Culver City is just a neighborhood in Los Angeles, not a suburb. So when you send your hate mail, make sure you don't put "Culver City, CA" on the envelope. :P

[Cyrus Farivar @ Aug 26th 2006 2:45PM]

I think that the Culver City City Council would disagree with you.

http://www.culvercity.org/citygov/gov_council.html

[Josh K @ Aug 26th 2006 6:28PM]

I wonder why? Maybe because Sony has headquarters there???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culver_City,_California

[Asher @ Aug 26th 2006 6:55PM]

>> this new filter will "help safeguard system users from being subject to illegal files" -- as if somehow all of these "illegal files" just come raining down out of the sky on innocent folks

These files don't just pop up -- they're being subjected onto us by file sharing child molesting terrorists, who will stop at nothing to strike in the middle of a good ol' wholesome American community.

[stugots @ Aug 27th 2006 1:26AM]

small town next to a big town, culver city's a suburb. it's also home to sony studios, i'm sure they somehow influenced that decision

[longbordr52 @ Aug 27th 2006 2:05AM]

Ha, lets put this whole Culver City thing to rest. I live in Culver City, CA and it is very much its own city. It has its own police, fire department, city council, city constitution. It is a smaller city of about 40000 surrounded by Los Angeles. So if you're going to write a letter to culver city, make sure you address it "culver city, CA".

[Steve Savage @ Aug 28th 2006 4:06PM]

Well after all it is free. You get what you pay for. It could be far worse, it could just be a single advertising portal with popups.