There does seem a need to pursue some legal reforms to protect home and perhaps small business computer and especially Internet users (perhaps even cell phone users, too) from “frightening” legal exposures. Consumers, as we know, face sudden civil liability exposure if they illegally download copyrighted materials, especially songs and movies. Most of the exposure in practice seems to come from P2P networks, particularly for users who set themselves up as “nodes.”
Parents have been sued (starting with phone calls) for activities of their kids or even visitors who used their computers. Another exposure would come from making illegal copies of software or movies. Moviegoers have, in a few occasions, been arrested and prosecuted for trying to camcord trailers of films in movie theaters.
Nevertheless, it sounds like, by analogy to the P2P suits, there could be a theoretical exposure for consumers that the law should address. The issue could come up in the Viacom litigation.

The other exposure could come with “accidental” possession of child pornography (from machine infection, even in the workplace) by mere searching and surfing. Someone may not know from the title of a field that illegal content is present.
Home users also believe that if they visit sites or services hosted by trustworthy companies they will be all right. Of course, these companies cannot be required to prescreen what is published and depend on user feedback to notify them of infringing or illegal materials.
Users (not legally advanced) might believe that they are protecting themselves by flagging or reporting content that is remotely questionable, burdening ISPs or publishing services and employees who themselves lack legal training.