Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cbosgd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!mark
From: mark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton)
Newsgroups: net.news
Subject: Re: The cost of moderating satellite News
Message-ID: <649@cbosgd.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 6-Jan-85 00:49:32 EST
Article-I.D.: cbosgd.649
Posted: Sun Jan  6 00:49:32 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 6-Jan-85 05:16:20 EST
References: <1319@eosp1.UUCP> <20980049@cmu-cs-k.ARPA>
Organization: Bell Labs, Columbus
Lines: 29

In article <20980049@cmu-cs-k.ARPA> tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) writes:
>Toby Robison is interesting as usual, but I feel the point of my concern has
>not been addressed directly.  Is there some legal requirement that
>satellite-broadcast USENET messages not contain words which some people call
>"obscene"?  If not, then I strongly suggest that such words not be used as a
>criterion for rejection of an article by satellite article screeners.

Obscene words are not the issue.  The problem is another type of message:
the one that encourages and assists illegal behavior.  Such as
	A working telephone credit card number is xxx-xxx-xxxx.
	Have fun!
or
	I have proof that  has embezzled
	large sums of money from .

In cases like this, someone gets hurt.  That someone could be looking
for someone to sue, and the company with the transmission facility is
an obvious target.  The recent bboard case, where the computer on which
the bboard resided was confiscated, sets a precedent.  We have to take
whatever measures we reasonably can to prevent such things from happening.
I understand that the company in question has specifically insisted that
everything they broadcast be screened.

I can't imagine how an AI program could be expected to detect something
like this.  Besides, if such a program were put into place, it would have
bugs that would quickly become well known, and it would become easy to
fool it.

	Mark Horton