Marketers of Internet pornography are trying their best to market to Utahns, regardless of age.

The latest tactic involves a heavily funded federal lawsuit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court stating that the Child Protection Registry Act, aimed at protecting children who use the Internet, is unconstitutional. The lawsuit, deemed inevitable by state officials earlier this year, was filed against the state and officials who regulate Utah's laws.

California-based Free Speech Coalition filed the suit in hopes to void effects the registry created when it was signed into law during the 2003 Legislative Session. They claim the law is "overbroad" and "creates more problems than it solves . . . and unduly burdens and restricts the rights of (those) who use the Internet as an effective tool of commercial expression," as stated in court documents.

They are asking the court to invalidate the law and lift its restrictions, which they claim "imposes inconsistent and unfair burdens on interstate and foreign commerce."

Matthew Prince, CEO of Unspam, the Park City-based company selected by the state to administer the registry, said the court will likely side with parents in this issue and uphold laws that protect children from blatant harm.

"Kids have the fundamental right to be kids, to be innocent," he said. "What this is trying to determine is who has the right to decide what ends up in a child's inbox."

The coalition states in the filing that because the Internet has no borders, it would be impossible to regulate such world-wide communication and have a local effect. They also claim that with e-mail's increasing popularity, marketers have the right to use it as a commodity, free of limitations.

"There's always reason to worry when you're up against an industry as big as the adult-products industry," Prince said.

He points to a 1970 case regarding similar issues, specifically the Mail Preference Service, a 1968 law regarding solicitation via "snail mail," as a viable precedent set in Utah's favor. The case established the right to not have ideas forced upon an individual in any way.

The case, Rowan v. U.S. Post Office, states "we are often captives outside the sanctuary of the home and subject to objectionable speech and other sound does not mean that we must be captives everywhere." It upheld the service as a means for individuals to object to receiving unsolicited adult materials through the mail.