Black pages

[Elisabeth Roche]

*If* there is small comfort in this postings analysis, I will take it.:))

I decided not to black out my page and went straight into civil disobedience..
join me or not but stop talking about some kind of "moral issue" when we all
know it all about "big bucks"

Elisabeth Roche ace at opus1.com
http://www.opus1.com/~ace
serendipity RULES!

----fwd original message------
At 02:19 PM 2/9/96 -0800, Albert Lunde wrote:
>At 11:29 AM 2/9/96, David L. King wrote:
>>> But material on subjects like AIDS, or Rennassance painting, or
>>> American history (try explaining 1968) or literature like Ulysses
>>> can all be impacted.
>>
>>But, is this a problem now? My understanding of this bill is that now, if
>>they want to, the FCC can "regulate" the Internet, much like they
>>"regulate" broadcast tv and radio. But things like date rape, civil
>>rights, AIDS, etc. are all represented on tv and radio - why would the
>>fcc do anything different on the internet?
>
>The standard of "indecency" is similar to broadcast television, but I don't
>think this law depends on FCC regulation to enforce it. I think rather, the
>amendments were added on to a section of law previously having to do with
>telephone harrassment.
>
>You really need to look at details of the law before and after to see the
>full impact.  In prior drafts, section titles and abstracts were a bit
>misleading.
>
>(I'm not a lawyer and I've only read parts of the final version.)
>
>---
>    Albert Lunde                      Albert-Lunde at nwu.edu
>
>
>