Let's take a look at the "there ought to be a law"  crowd.  I agree, there ought to be a law preventing the former from ever using that phrase.  Take our AG for the USSA ( The extra S is fo socialist)  whose all in favour of yet another law to dissuade those from committing a heinous crime by  making a new lesser crime with lower penalties than the "for the children" laws they  masquerade under.  In short not being content with having copa turfed out on two occasions, having their "request" to Google tossed back in their face  for being needlessly intrusive and imposing a burden on Google ( private business is not , ok should not be acting as agents of the state ) they want to go further.

They  want a gov seal displayed atop sites that contain what they define to be pornographic. Failure to show your allegiance to "miniweb" = Five years in the pen. Even more ominous is to help them gain convictions they want providers to retain data for a "reasonable" amount of time.   That's nice impose the cost of your faux morality on those companies in the USA while the rest of the hosting world rightly ignores it and has a competitive advantage. l For this to work having an offshore web account would need to be illegal, servers would need to be licenced  and  hey  Hi China, how's the wife and male kids? Now if only we could tie it all in with a large portal that has experience with dealing with totalitarian regimes.

This is not a Bush bash, the failed law mentioned above was  very much a Clinton proposal but it had the word Child in the act which means you can't vote against it. You're not anti children are you?