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 thathas 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