Adult cypersex chat rooms
 In 1997, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld a lower court's ruling that declared a portion of the CDA unconstitutional because it violated the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment. The average person, applying contemporary community standards finds the material as a whole is directed toward an unhealthy, abnormal, obsessive, morbid or shameful interest in sex; and 2. The average person applying contemporary community standards would find that it has a predominate tendency to appeal to the unhealthy or shameful interest of minors in sex. The average person applying contemporary standards would find it patently offensive to adults to make this sexually explicit material available for minors. It lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors." Further, there are indecency laws that protect children from the harmful effects of pornography. On October 21, 1998, President Clinton signed The Child Online Protection Act (COPA).However, certain provisions were left intact, including parts dealing with child pornography, child predators, and Internet obscenity, as discussed below. The material depicts sexual conduct (ultimate sex acts, masturbation, torture, bondage, sex with animals, excretory functions or lewd exhibition of the genitals) in a patently offensive manner substantially throughout the material. The material, as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." The above standards have also been extended for the online medium. It is illegal to use the telephone, radio or broadcast television to transmit indecent materials. Its purpose was to restrict minors (children under 17) from accessing commercial Internet sites containing "harmful material." The bill seeks to direct commercial Web site operators to screen out harmful material, making it a federal crime to commercially distribute material considered harmful to minors, with up to 0,000 of penalties for each day of violation and a maximum sentence of six months in prison.It is illegal to use registered trademarks or meta tags to lure children to obscene material. Furthermore, the US Supreme Court recently defended a 1996 Virginia state law which prohibits employees (including university staff and faculty) from using state computers to look at pornographic sites.
The court ruled that AOL is not liable, stating, "The simple fact of notice surely cannot transform one from an original publisher to a distributor in the eyes of the law.Although a federal judge and several professors argued that the law violated First Amendment rights, the U. appeals court disagreed, saying that prohibiting access on state owned computers is consistent with the First Amendment.The Supreme Court agreed by refusing to review the decision.It also required that web sites that can be accessed by children under 13 years of age must post their policy describing the information they would gather about site visitors. It stated that "child pornography, like obscenity, is unprotected by the First Amendment if it involves scienter and a visual depiction of sexual conduct by children without serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." Federal laws also prohibit the transmission of child pornography over the Internet.Furthermore, these sites would need to have a parental notification and approval system implemented. Child pornography is defined as a visual depiction of a child under the age of 18 years engaged in actual or simulated sexual conduct, including a lewd or lascivious exhibition of the genitals.