Look, kiddie porn and terrorism are bad. Obvious. But what better way for a government to push through controversial legislation quickly than to harness their emotive properties? After all, what self-respecting member of the US House of Representatives would vote against legislation called Securing Adolescents From Exploitation-Online, or SAFE? Only 2 it turns out (Rep. Paul Broun from Georgia and Rep. presidential candidate, Ron Paul) with 409 members voting yesterday in favor. The new bill requires everyone (that includes you and Starbucks) offering an open WiFi connection to the public to be on the lookout for report known "illegal images" and "obscene" cartoons and drawings. The reporting requirement extends to cover social networking sites, ISPs, and email providers. Failing to dutifully report what you've seen (or haven't seen but are unwittingly complicit in) could leave your data seized and in debt from fines of up to $300,000. This isn't a call to arms, however...

Though it did take a bit longer than the six months Ofcom's chief technologist, Professor William Webb was hoping for, ultra-wideband has finally been given the green light in the UK. New legislation will mean that "UK users will not need a license to use UWB devices when they hit shelves in the future," and Ofcom's Chief Executive Ed Richards was quoted as saying that "where possible, we want to remove restrictions on the use of spectrum to allow the market to develop new and innovative services, such as UWB, for the benefit of consumers." So there you have it (UK-based) folks, just a few more days (August 13th, to be precise) before UWB usage is fair game on your side of the pond.

[Via The Register]

Looks like Warner and the IIPA managed to rack up a minor victory in the Great White North, as new legislation has officially been introduced in Ottawa which would result in the permanent crackdown on camcording in movie theaters. While we don't really hold with Montreal filmmaker Kevin Tierney, who supported the new anti-piracy bill and said, "you can't go to a concert and put a tape recorder on and steal it" (yes, you can -- and many venues and musicians encourage fans to do just that), we also don't necessarily think it's wrong to not want users to make bootleg recordings of movies. Now, is it something that should be punished by two years in prison even if you're doing it for personal use, as this new Canadian law predicates? Hell no. Can't we please go back to the days of hard time for, you know, hard crime?

[Thanks Jason, everyone who sent this in]

We've already seen where mooching off an open WiFi signal can land you in Singapore, but are we really to that point here in the US of A? Apparently, Utah lawmakers are considering "penalizing those who leave their wireless networks open" as they trial "various methods of quelling free speech controlling questionable internet content." The paranoid officials are seemingly attempting to "reward ISPs that self-police access to pornography," as the primary concern seems to stem from open signals leading to unmonitored porn surfing by kiddos under 18. Interestingly, one proponent of the plan actually goes so far as to criticize the "unregulated internet," presumably suggesting that a world of controlled, censored, and dictated material would create a much more amicable environment. Still, one (level-headed) local ISP owner stated that shutting down free WiFi zones would damage Utah's reputation, as it would appear as a locale that "is restricting technology rather than expanding it." Truthfully, we tend to agree.

[Via Wired]

In a move that may pave the way for legislation forbidding phone and cable companies from charging content providers a premium for access to customers, the House Judiciary Committee today approved the net neutrality bill introduced by Committee Chair James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and Ranking Member John Conyers (D-MI). The bill, known formally as the "Internet Freedom and Nondiscrimination Act," must still go to the full House, where it faces a competing bill promulgated by the Commerce Committee. The bill cleared the Committee 20-13, with bipartisan support. If you have no idea what we're talking about, that's cool -- we haven't covered it much here on Engadget, but it's a very important issue about how the internet is or isn't governed by big communications companies in the years to come.

You'd think that Senator Ted Stevens, a man we've mentioned here many a time before, would have had a change of heart about the broadcast flag legislation in the brief moment of clarity he supposedly had (that prompted IPac to send all those Congresspeople free iPods). Well, we hate to break it to you, but the broadcast flag is back yet again, thanks to you-know-who. The wily creature last spotted in H.R. 4861 (the Audio Broadcast Flag Licensing Act of 2006), has been seen riding along with another bill Stevens recently introduced, a 135 page behemoth on net neutrality (which is a whole 'nother issue we're not even gonna get into right now). We're not sure how many times Stevens or other officials feel obligated to try resurrecting this egregious offense against consumer rights and fair use, but we'll be there with, um, the CEA, to make sure we do our part to see it struck down (again), as well as to politely tell Mr. Stevens, "No, you get a job."

[Via IPAC and BoingBoing]