Communications Decency Act
Brian Cameron
understand _how_ the gov't is (was) planning to enforce it... After all, it
would require every ISP keeping records of where their users go, which means
that they would have to obtain a wire tap and a computer to monitor each line
that they have... Even if this is done, one could claim that someone else was
using their account, and that they had no knowledge of it... This is just
another step in the gov't's move to regulate us into submission, and maybe
even socialism... I don't believe that they could ever put the CDA into
effect on the 'net...
Brian
b...@memory.ithaca.ny.us
--
This message was created on Memory Alpha BBS * 607-257-5822.
Contact postm...@memory.ithaca.ny.us with any questions.
Noah Daniels
b...@memory.ithaca.ny.us wrote:
> While I understand the intent and principle of this bill, I don't quite
> understand _how_ the gov't is (was) planning to enforce it... After all, it
> would require every ISP keeping records of where their users go, which means
> that they would have to obtain a wire tap and a computer to monitor each line
> that they have... Even if this is done, one could claim that someone else was
> using their account, and that they had no knowledge of it... This is just
> another step in the gov't's move to regulate us into submission, and maybe
> even socialism... I don't believe that they could ever put the CDA into
> effect on the 'net...
What could this possibly have to do with socialism? Why is it people try
to portray every little unconstitutional censorship law as 'socialism'
when it doesn't have a damn thing to do with it? Socialism is IMHO a
wonderful economic system but one that is impractical for anything larger
than a commune. If you mean to call the bill fascist, perhaps it is that.
But that has nothing to do with socialism; the fact that the former USSR
practiced censorship and media control has nothing to do with it being a
pseudo-communist government; Nazi Germany did the same thing and hated
Communists more than anything but Jews.
However, you are slightly mistaken about enforcement. You could be
prosecuted if you run a site (FTP, HTTP, whatever) that serves up porn, or
if you email or post a news article with profanity in it (as in 'Fuck
Senator Exon!') or with an attached porn JPEG. No, it is enforcible enough
to make it very scary. And more important, it's dangerous because it
establishes a precedent for government censorship.
Of course, this doesn't really belong in this newsgroup _at all_...
--
-- Noah Daniels
{ndan...@cc.swarthmore.edu}
"You see things and say 'Why?'; but I dream
things that never were and I say 'Why not?'" --G.B. Shaw
Bob Rakov
ndan...@cc.swarthmore.edu (Noah Daniels) wrote:
> Of course, this doesn't really belong in this newsgroup _at all_...
*everybody's* vocal support to remind the government of its limits.
This is a seminal time for telcommunications. Maybe a few percent of the
population is currently using the internet? What better time for the
government to establish precident and get its legislative foot in the
door. In 5 years this will not be possible as an exponentially larger
fraction of Americans will be online and thus protest the attempts at
censorship. Right now you and I (and other's on the "leading edge" have a
responsibility to cry "FOUL" as loud as we can. The fellow to whom you
were replying obviously hasn't gotten the message yet.
-bob
Brian Cameron
> need *everybody's* vocal support to remind the
> government of its limits.
On the contrary; while I am "just a kid" (16), and I admit I'm not up to
date on everything in our gov't, I have been following the CDA rather
closely. Therefore, I resent your saying that I am "uninformed"... Maybe I am
_mis_informed, but NOT _un_informed.
> Right now you and I (and other's on the "leading
> edge" have a responsibility to cry "FOUL" as
> loud as we can. The fellow to whom you were
> replying obviously hasn't gotten the message
> yet.
Actually, I think I have gotten the message: Big Brother wants to control
us even more than he already does, and since no one raised too much of a fuss
until _after_ the bill was passed and signed, they think they are getting
away with it. However, moves are underway to repeal it, and Sen. Leahy
(Vermont) is on the forefront of this move. Check the page
http://www.senate.gov/~leahy/950209.html
for his views on this. I agree with him completely... but since I'm not of
legal age, I can't do more than sign petitions... and this might be an
excellent time to start one... so see my next message.
Thomas Reed
ndan...@cc.swarthmore.edu (Noah Daniels) wrote:
>You could be
>prosecuted if you run a site (FTP, HTTP, whatever) that serves up porn, or
>if you email or post a news article with profanity in it (as in 'Fuck
>Senator Exon!') or with an attached porn JPEG.
A couple notes on this.
First, someone with a vendetta against me could upload a porn JPEG to my
FTP site's drop folder, and then claim to "find" it a week later. I could
serve jail time. As could anyone who maintains an FTP site that supports
uploads.
Second, the "porn" JPEG could be a scanned image from an underwear ad in
your local paper, and according to this new law, I could STILL serve time
for it.
Act now against this new bill! Go to:
for more info!
-Thomas
=====================================================
Thomas Reed Washington University
re...@visar.wustl.edu Medical School
re...@medicine.wustl.edu Saint Louis, MO
http://medinfo.wustl.edu/~reed
-----------------------------------------------------
Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no
influence on society. -- Mark Twain
=====================================================
Opinions posted are not the opinions of Wash. U.
Garner R. Miller
re...@medicine.wustl.edu (Thomas Reed) wrote:
> Act now against this new bill!
Agreed. I e-mailed Senator Leahy of Vermont to personally thank him for
standing up in opposition to this bill. The following morning (this
morning, in fact), I received this reply in e-mail:
Subject: Rule: Re: The CDA
Sent: 2/14/96 3:58 PM
Received: 2/14/96 6:37 PM
From: Senato...@leahy.senate.gov
To: Garner R. Miller, gmi...@iu.net
I really appreciate getting your message about the so-called
"Communications Decency Act."
On February 9, I introduced S. 1567, a bill to repeal this misguided
attempt to censor the words used and topics discussed on the Internet.
You can find the text of the bill and a copy of my full statement at:
http://www.senate.gov/member/vt/leahy/general/protect.html
Rather than use the heavy hand of government censorship, I believe we
should encourage parents to use the growing number of technical tools
available to control what their children may access on-line.
We have a long, hard struggle ahead of us to reverse this misguided
law. I am heartened and encouraged by the outpouring of support from
Internet users all over the country in support of my efforts to
protect our First Amendment rights when we go on-line. We must all
keep working to convince a majority of Senators that we need to
approach this whole issue rationally and sensibly. Grassroots support
like yours is important to make this happen.
Please stay in touch.
==========
Don't go down without a fight, guys. The URL he mentions in his letter
provides a link to the full text of the Telecommunications bill. I urge
everyone to download and read it, particularly beginning with section
501. That's where the "decency" provisions start, and it's scary stuff.
Not only is anything remotely sexual affected, but anything relating to
excretory functions, too! This is incredible.
Piss on you, Senator Exon. <grin>
- Garner
--
Garner R. Miller, Flight Instructor
http://www.net21.com/garner/
BATFC: The "C" stands for "Censorship"
Mr. Viper RT/10
book "the Scarlet Letter"", Huckleberry Fin", you could be prosecuted.
Even if you put up artwork of Michealangelo you could got to jail for 2
years!