🚀 go-pugleaf

: William Yang (wyang@freenet.columbus.oh.us) wrote:
: : Uhm, actually, my understanding is that obscenity actually has a legal
: : definition.  I'm quite certain "indecency" doesn't.  I'm not sure if
: : "patently offensive" does or not.

Obsenity = a work depicts or describes sexual conduct in a way that the
           average person, applying contemporary community standards 
           would find the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prureint
           interest, whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently
           offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by state
           law, and whether the work taken as a whole, lacks serious
           literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
           Miller v. California, 413 US 15, 93 S.Ct. 2607.

Indecency = obscene; lewd; tending to the corruption of the morals.
            Dunlop v. US, 165 US 486, 17 S.Ct. 375. (this is an old
            case, and I'm sure there's a newer definition - personally
            I like US Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's definition
            which went something like "I couldn't describe it to you,
            except to say that I know it when I see it.")
-- 
Martin Cordero
BSCIS ('92 Ohio State), JD ('95 Chicago-Kent)
mcordero@freenet.columbus.oh.us