🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4s447k$e20@news3.realtime.net>, bladex@bga.com (David Smith) writes:
>Morton Goldmacher (alchemy@interlog.com) wrote:
>: The law on what constitutes criminally obscene material is pretty
>: clear and unambiguous. 
>
>I am familiar with the US obscenity ruling, Miller v. California.
>
>What is the Canadian equivalent?  What is the test for determining 
>whether an item is obscene or not?
>

I'm not sure but I believe it encompasses (or if it doesn't, it should)
the following:

1. does it have academic merit? yes/no
2. does it exploit children for sexual purposes? yes/no
3. if it has artistic merit, did the models/individuals
   consent to engaging in something morally repugnant,
   knowing that no element of exploitation was involved? yes/no
   (ie., were they willing participants, did they have the
   choice to say no, did they know what was going on)
4. did the person communicating the allegedly obscene material,
   by placing it in the public domain, do so for some social
   merit that is educational or relevant to some aspect
   of a social issue? yes/no
5. does the material portray or promote demeaning, degrading or otherwise
   dehumanizing acts of one individual on another, consentual or not? yes/no
6. does the material, by being placed in the public domain,
   constitute a reasonable threat to social well-being of children, if
   children are allowed access to it by reason of public
   availability, either in a newsgroup or in some form which
   is a result of downloading from the internet? yes/no
7. does the material portray or promote violent acts against
   an individual, either involving sex or not? yes/no
8. does the material portray or promote acts which are
   illegal and contrary to the laws of Canada? yes/no
9. is the material intended to be satire or fair use of a subject? yes/no
10. are the acts portrayed or promoted real or simulated? yes/no
11. is there a disclaimer or warning present, indicating the
    viewer or reader will have reasonable warning of the content? yes/no
12. is the material intended to cause harm or embarassment to those
    who are portrayed, either in a fictional or pictoral means? yes/no
13. is the material an original creation or a copy of a previously
    published, broadcast or filmed work by someone else? yes/no
14. has reasonable care been exercised to censor objectionable material
    by the person communicating the material? yes/no
15. does the material exploit a member or members of an identified
    group of society? yes/no


If you ask me, those are the questions I'd be asking to distinguish
if the material is art (ie., see R. vs. Eli Langer, the artist dude
in Toronto) or if it is sexually explicit material of a certain variety or
if it is not sexually explicit but designed to promote illegal or immoral
acts that are contrary to the law.

But, I think a lawyer might have some interesting thoughts on this.

Shawn
http://www.ptbo.igs.net/~shawn

>
>
>--
>David Smith           *  Next EFF-Austin meeting: 
>bladex@bga.com        *  Fifth Anniversary Cyberdawg
>President, EFF-Austin *  Steve Jackson Games, 2700-A Metcalfe
>512-304-6308          *  Saturday, July 20th, 6:00 p.m. to dusk

* Any unsolicited commercial e-mail and/or the inclusion of my user-id in    
* any mailing list without my express prior written approval, including the 
* receipt of a mass e-mail message and/or the unauthorized reselling of this
* user-id to mailing list vendors, will be met with a complaint to your 
* internet provider. It is recommended you do not attempt these practices.
* Should you choose to ignore this warning, you will be subject to any remedy 
* which may be exercised by your internet provider. You have been warned.