In response to Prof’s post I did read the bill carefully. Here is what it says:
Page 239, Line 3
Relief granted under this section against an interactive computer service shall-
A) be limited to the removal of, or disabling of access to, an online site violating section 5363, or a hypertext link to an online site violating such section, that resides on a computer server that such service controls or operates, except that the limitation in this subparagraph shall not apply if the service is subject to liability under this section under section 5367;
be available only after notice to the interactive computer service and an opportunity for the service to appear are provided;
c) not impose any obligation on an interactive computer service to monitor its service or to affirmatively seek facts indicating activity violating this subchapter;
D) specify the interactive computer service to which it applies; and
E) specifically identify the location of the online site or hypertext link to be removed or access to which is to be disabled.
In the above area it talks of an exemption to these limitations on relief and has a reference to section 5367 which states that a service provider may be liable if they have “actual knowledge AND controls of bets and wagers”.
Otherwise page 239 of the bill applies and relief is limited to the removal of, or disabling access to a site in violation. Furthermore, the relief shall not impose any obligation on an interactive computer service to monitor its service or to affirmatively seek facts indicating activity in violation.
It sure sounds like governmental agencies must make known a specific offending link and that there is no obligation to self-police.
Google may choose to filter results on their own, but the US government is not barring access for Google to US visitors so long as they remove specific offending links that they are formally given. This is a lot different than Communist China, although we are becoming somewhat more like them when it comes to the government’s approach to thought, debate, and privacy.