The as-yet-untitled act, “relating to prohibiting wireless Internet access to obscene materials on public property,” would require filtering software to block explicit content on state-provided wireless networks at correctional facilities, state buildings and other public properties.
“A state agency that provides wireless Internet access on state property may not allow access to obscene material through the use of that wireless access,” states the bill, which is currently before the Texas House State Affairs committee.
The restriction would not, however, apply to state-run universities and colleges.
Last May, Texas partnered with Tengo Internet to become the first state to provide free wireless access to travelers at rest stops.
“Texas’ highways are seeing an increasing number of business travelers, truckers and RVers, and access to email is important to them,” commented Andy Kieth, the program’s manager. “They have really responded favorably to our … hot spots on U.S. 287.”
“Since fatigue is a factor in 1.5 percent of all crashes, anything we can do to get people to pull off the road and take a break is going to make our highways safer,” Kieth added.
While the state doesn’t make available information on which sites and what types of content have been accessed most frequently through the service, there has been much speculation that truckers have been using it primarily to visit adult sites.
Should Brown’s bill pass into law, all that will be history as of September 1 — at least in theory; the bill makes no mention of how the filtering will be achieved.
The news set off heated debate on Slashdot.com.
“Someone is finally protecting the nation’s truckers from adult content; this is particularly good for all those underage truckers,” wrote a user posting as Shania Twain. “It might take a lot of work, but eventually we’ll get everything clean, clean, clean.”
User Provolt shot back, “It has little to do with whether people like porn or not. It comes down to the fact that many people don’t want to pay for someone else to download porn.”
Others pointed out that implementing filtering software could end up costing the state tens of thousands of dollars that could be spent elsewhere.
