[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 602 Reported in Senate (RS)]
Calendar No. 588
110th CONGRESS
2d Session
S. 602
[Report No. 110-268]
To develop the next generation of parental control technology.
_______________________________________________________________________
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
February 15, 2007
Mr. Pryor (for himself, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Dorgan, and Mr.
Johnson) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and
referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
March 3, 2008
Reported by Mr. Inouye, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute
[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed
in italic]
_______________________________________________________________________
A BILL
To develop the next generation of parental control technology.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
<DELETED>SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.</DELETED>
<DELETED> This Act may be cited as the ``Child Safe Viewing Act of
2007''.</DELETED>
<DELETED>SEC. 2. FINDINGS.</DELETED>
<DELETED> Congress finds the following:</DELETED>
<DELETED> (1) Video programming has a direct impact on a
child's perception of safe and reasonable behavior.</DELETED>
<DELETED> (2) Children imitate actions they witness on video
programming, including language, drug use, and sexual
conduct.</DELETED>
<DELETED> (3) Studies indicate that the strong appeal of
video programming erodes the ability of parents to develop
responsible attitudes and behavior in their children.</DELETED>
<DELETED> (4) The average American child watches 4 hours of
television each day.</DELETED>
<DELETED> (5) Seventy-five percent of adults surveyed
believe that television content marketed toward children should
be subject to compulsory principles.</DELETED>
<DELETED> (6) Ninety-nine and nine-tenths percent of all
consumer complaints logged by the Federal Communications
Commission in the first quarter of 2006 regarding radio and
television broadcasting were because of obscenity, indecency,
and profanity.</DELETED>
<DELETED> (7) There is a compelling government interest in
empowering parents to limit their children's exposure to
harmful television content.</DELETED>
<DELETED> (8) Section 1 of the Communications Act of 1934
requires the Federal Communications Commission to promote the
safety of life and property through the use of wire and radio
communications.</DELETED>
<DELETED> (9) In the Telecommunications Act of 1996,
Congress authorized Parental Choice in Television Programming
and the V-Chip. Congress further directed action on alternative
blocking technology as new video technology advanced.</DELETED>
<DELETED>SEC. 3. EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE PARENTAL CONTROL
TECHNOLOGIES.</DELETED>
<DELETED> (a) Rulemaking Proceeding Required.--Not later than 120
days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Federal
Communications Commission shall initiate a proceeding to consider
measures to encourage or require the use of advanced blocking
technologies that are compatible with various communications devices or
platforms.</DELETED>
<DELETED> (b) Content of Proceeding.--In conducting the proceeding
required under subsection (a), the Federal Communications Commission
shall consider advanced blocking technologies that--</DELETED>
<DELETED> (1) may be appropriate across a wide variety of
distribution platforms, including wired, wireless, and Internet
platforms;</DELETED>
<DELETED> (2) may be appropriate across a wide variety of
devices capable of transmitting or receiving video or audio
programming, including television sets, DVD players, VCRs,
cable set top boxes, satellite receivers, and wireless
devices;</DELETED>
<DELETED> (3) can filter language based upon information in
closed captioning;</DELETED>
<DELETED> (4) operate independently of ratings pre-assigned
by the creator of such video or audio programming;
and</DELETED>
<DELETED> (5) may be effective in enhancing the ability of a
parent to protect his or her child from indecent or
objectionable programming, as determined by such
parent.</DELETED>
<DELETED> (c) Definition.--In this section, the term ``advanced
blocking technologies'' means technologies that can improve or enhance
the ability of a parent to protect his or her child from any indecent
or objectionable video or audio programming, as determined by such
parent, that is transmitted through the use of wire, wireless, or radio
communication.</DELETED>
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Child Safe Viewing Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) Video programming has a direct impact on a child's
perception of safe and reasonable behavior.
(2) Children may imitate actions they witness on video
programming, including language, drug use, and sexual conduct.
(3) Studies suggest that the strong appeal of video
programming erodes the ability of parents to develop
responsible attitudes and behavior in their children.
(4) The average American child watches 4 hours of
television each day.
(5) 99.9 percent of all consumer complaints logged by the
Federal Communications Commission in the first quarter of 2006
regarding radio and television broadcasting were because of
obscenity, indecency, and profanity.
(6) There is a compelling government interest in empowering
parents to limit their children's exposure to harmful
television content.
(7) Section 1 of the Communications Act of 1934 requires
the Federal Communications Commission to promote the safety of
life and property through the use of wire and radio
communications.
(8) In the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Congress
authorized Parental Choice in Television Programming and the V-
Chip. Congress further directed action on alternative blocking
technology as new video technology advanced.
SEC. 3. EXAMINATION OF ADVANCED BLOCKING TECHNOLOGIES.
(a) Inquiry Required.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall
initiate a notice of inquiry to consider measures to examine--
(1) the existence and availability of advanced blocking
technologies that are compatible with various communications
devices or platforms; and
(2) methods of encouraging the development, deployment, and
use of such technology by parents that do not affect the
packaging or pricing of a content provider's offering.
(b) Content of Proceeding.--In conducting the inquiry required
under subsection (a), the Commission shall consider advanced blocking
technologies that--
(1) may be appropriate across a wide variety of
distribution platforms, including wired, wireless, and Internet
platforms;
(2) may be appropriate across a wide variety of devices
capable of transmitting or receiving video or audio
programming, including television sets, DVD players, VCRs,
cable set top boxes, satellite receivers, and wireless devices;
(3) can filter language based upon information in closed
captioning;
(4) operate independently of ratings pre-assigned by the
creator of such video or audio programming; and
(5) may be effective in enhancing the ability of a parent
to protect his or her child from indecent or objectionable
programming, as determined by such parent.
(c) Reporting.--Not later than 270 days after the enactment of this
Act, the Commission shall issue a report to Congress detailing any
findings resulting from the inquiry required under subsection (a).
(d) Definition.--In this section, the term ``advanced blocking
technologies'' means technologies that can improve or enhance the
ability of a parent to protect his or her child from any indecent or
objectionable video or audio programming, as determined by such parent,
that is transmitted through the use of wire, wireless, or radio
communication.
Calendar No. 588
110th CONGRESS
2d Session
S. 602
[Report No. 110-268]
_______________________________________________________________________
A BILL
To develop the next generation of parental control technology.
_______________________________________________________________________
March 3, 2008
Reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute