[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]
Re: Re[2]: Communications Decency Act (CDA) and the SCA
On Mon, 12 Feb 1996, Chuck Graves wrote:
> Greetings, all.
>
> Am I missing something about the CDA? I thought said Act had to do
> with: 1) sexually explicit materials and 2) public availability to
> minors.
Thats right. And 'sexual explict' is very vauge. The standards are
being taken acroos the board, thus, the most restrictive apply.
> Frankly, no one has taken away your right to privately post whatever
> you damn well please.
Wrong. If you post to a list that is avliable to minors or that has
unrestricted access, you can be liable for distributing obscene material
to a minor (if the material is judged obscene).
> And checking the content of a private post is tantamount to opening
> your private mail. Nasty business without a court order.
Wrong again. E-mail is considered a telephone call and is regulated by
such rules. Of course, it's illegal (or was) to tap a phone line. Regan
OTOH, was all for spying on American citizens.
> Enforcement beyond that I would think: 1) absurd, 2) criminal, 3)
> unconstitutional, and 4) impossible...in increasing degree of effort
> (or insanity as the case may be.)
That may be, but these _are_ Republicans we are talking about. Common
sense and the realities of the internet are not something under
consideration here. An interesting note: Newt - who has his own Web
page, opposed the law.
> Of course, I may have missed something. What do you think, Yaakov?
>
> Regards,
> Tadhg
>
> ps. It does bring up an interesting problem. If you post something on
> a bulletin board in NYC and someone looks in from Omaha, whose
> standards of 'decency' apply? Reader or poster? Wouldn't you just love
> to be on the 'Big Bench' when that one hits? 8^)
The standards of Omaha apply. The internet reaches all areas of the
country, thus the most restrictive rules are applied. This was already
brought up when a sting op conducted in Tennesse nabbed someone in
California. Tennesse rules were applied, regardless of the fact the
material was legal in California.
Michael Limner, esq
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook *
* susano@access.digex.net / surbrook@aol.com *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************