- From: Darren New <dnew@sgf.fv.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jun 1995 15:30:22 +0100
- To: "Carl M. Kadie" <kadie@eff.org>
- Cc: caci@media.mit.edu, www-talk@www10.w3.org, rating@junction.net
> Virtually all laws, both just and unjust, are enforced one person at a > time. Except for a few cases of massive civil disobedience > one-person-at-a-time seems to do the trick. After a few successful > prosecutions most people will obey even an unjust laws. Yep. So let's set up a system that keeps those laws from being created in the first place. > Not true. The reason that Pacificia Radio was fined for broadcasting a > discussion of censorship that included the word "fuck" (much like this > discussion) was because the Court said the First Amendment doesn't > apply fully to radio and TV broadcasts. Why? Because the Courts said > that the radio and TV broadcast spectrum is so scarce and "uniquely > intrusive" that government regulation of content is justified. The "uniquely intrusive" nature is that of being a broadcast medium, yes? I just didn't have the case sitting in front of me. :-) Anyway, what you're apparently saying is it's too late, there's already laws on the book that make this very thread illegal because we've both said "fuck". So why do you think my proposal will make things worse? And what would you suggest as a better alternative? I'm still not following you here. I probably am going to stop responding to this thread, since you're talking about old laws and I'm talking about computer programs. Unless you want to address something to do with computer programs, or at least make constructive comments, there's not much sense in continuing. Thanks! --Darren
Received on Thursday, 8 June 1995 15:33:06 UTC