🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3s49df$cgp@worf.qntm.com>,
cook@rzdisk.enet.qntm.com (Wakko Warner) was heard to utter:
> In article <NILS.95Jun19114038@sparrowhawk.dartmouth.edu>, nils@cs.dartmouth.edu (Nils Nieuwejaar) writes:
> >
> >_What_ they are banning is the least important issue here.
> >
> >The fundamental issue is that they think they can ban anything at all.
> 
> 	I understand that. Bear with me because I'm merely playing
> 	devils advocate.
> 
> >You may be in favor of 'banning smut', but how would you feel if they
> >decided talk.politics.guns was a likely hangout for militia members,
> >and had it banned?
> 
> 	That's not covered in the bill, is it? The laws that they
> 	want to apply to Internet are existing laws that cover 
> 	telephones, television, radio, etc.

The point isn't that this particular bill will eliminate conversation about
guns. It's that once the banning starts, where does it stop? As for your
other point, no, it is not just an extension on telephone, TV, and radio
laws. AT&T executives do not get arrested when someone makes a long
distance obscene call. Yet your service provider could. Television and
radio are completely different animals, since they are one-way, single to
many communication devices. The internet is a many to many, single to many,
many to single, single to single communications "device." If I sent a
"dirty" e-mail to my wife, and my ISP read it somehow, he wouldbe obligated
to prevent it from being delivered. Do you really want your ISP to read ALL
your mail and postings? DO you want to pay $100/month (yes, just a random
guess) to pay for this type of surveillance?

> 
> >Of course, there are numerous other more pragmatic issues as well.
> >First, if I'm an internet provider and somebody in Amsterdam posts
> >'smut' on alt.binaries.pictures.misc, when it propagates to my site I
> >will become a violator of this new law even though I haven't actually
> >done anything.  What do I do?  Scan every single posting that comes in
> >to be sure it is clean?  Not bloody likely.
> 
> 	That's the big question in regards to the bill. No easy
> 	answer if you're a politician.

But like all politically motivated bills, there will likely be nothing in it
explaining "how" to accomplish this. there will be no money set aside for
ISPs to pay for this (unlike when the gov't forced the phone companies to
allow access, and set aside $400 million or so). And then, if people do
come up with a means of providing some coverage, they bcome liable for
anything said on their network that they don't catch (see Prodigy case).

What ever happened to "no unfunded mandates?"
> 
> >Second, 'obscenity' is determined by 'community standards'.  If I run
> >a BBS in California, and somebody from Tennessee dials in, if they
> >find something on the BBS that violates TN community standards, I've
> >violated the law even if that something isn't 'obscene' in California.
> 
> 	Are there any current laws that set precedent for this?

This refers to a case recently about a couple that ran an adult BBS in CA,
and got arrested becuase a bored postal inspector (I believe) decided to
download some adult material. It is my understanding that the same
individual mailed some child pornography (US mail) to the couple to see of
they would post it. (They didn't). That's they problem with community
standards laws. A virtual community can span a variety of physical
communities, with different "standards" for obscenity. The Supreme Court
decision about this (obscenity is illegal, but we won't define obscenity)
is ridiculous. How can something be illegal if you can't even define what
it is?
> 
> 
>  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>     Peter R. Cook, Software guru, Republican, Tama, Paiste, and DW user, 
>     Animaniacs lover, Pete's Wicked drinker, VAX man, Quantumite, Iron 
>     Maiden fan, Blue Steel, PRC Records owner, gun owner, sword collector.
>     "The only thing the Democrats have to offer is fear itself" - D. Armey 
>     
>  


--
Mark               woody@ritz.mordor.com          mw4j@andrew.cmu.edu
*********************************************************************
Random lie:
                         The check is in the mail.
*********************************************************************
-- 
-Mark

woody@ritz.mordor.com
mw4j@andrew.cmu.edu