http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/seattle-library-lets-man-watch-porn-computers-despite-212244290.html
By Eric Pfeiffer
A Seattle library is making news after refusing to remove a man who was watching pornographic videos on a library computer.
"We're a library, so we facilitate access to constitutionally
protected information. We don't tell people what they can view and check
out," Seattle Public Library spokeswoman Andra Addison told Seattle PI.
"Filters compromise freedom of speech protected by the First
Amendment. We're not in the business of censoring information."
Seattle PI reports that when library patron Julie Howe saw the man,
she asked him to move to another computer. He refused. When Howe asked
the librarian to intervene, she also refused.
"She could see the screen from the information desk where we were
standing and was sympathetic, but said that the library doesn't censor
content," Howe wrote in an email published Tuesday on the neighborhood
blog, Lake City Live.
"And they can't be in the business of monitoring what their patrons are doing at any given computer."
However, in 2010 the Washington State Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3
decision that libraries can do exactly that. The ruling came after the
ACLU sued a rural library district that had attempted to filter porn
from its computers.
"A public library has traditionally and historically enjoyed broad
discretion to select materials to add to its collection of printed
materials for its patrons' use," the court wrote in its decision. "We
conclude that the same discretion must be afforded a public library to
choose what materials from millions of Internet sites it will add to its
collection and make available to its patrons."
Howe says she respects, understands and agrees with the freedom of
speech laws that protect the man's right to view pornography, but
nonetheless wishes there was a compromise for the library's other
patrons.
"I have had extensive conversations with the library about this
incident, as well as with the police and local representatives,"
wrote Howe. "The man's right to access constitutionally protected
information is fully protected (which I'm not in argument with), but our
right not to be inadvertent viewers is not."
Other library patrons have complained about similar incidents,
including those involving young children who were exposed to
pornographic images being viewed by other patrons.
The dilemma was summed up by another library patron, Jessica
Christensen, who told Seattle PI, "What I find ironic is that you can't
talk too loudly at the Seattle Public Libraries or you'll be asked to
keep it down so as not to distract the other patrons. You know, the
patrons viewing pornography."