Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!amdcad!sun!pitstop!sundc!seismo!uunet!cos!hadron!decuac!c3pe!aliza From: aliza@c3pe.UUCP (Aliza R. Panitz (AlmostLady)) Newsgroups: news.admin Subject: Who defines Net.Porn ? Keywords: porn, underage, lawsuit Message-ID: <3498@c3pe.UUCP> Date: 25 Sep 88 14:32:20 GMT References: <1278@cbnews.ATT.COM> <4805@whuts.UUCP> Reply-To: aliza@c3pe.UUCP (Aliza R. Panitz (AlmostLady)) Distribution: na Organization: K. L. Ginter & Associates, Inc. Lines: 30 In article <4805@whuts.UUCP> wv@whuts.UUCP (54299-DUNCAN,W.) writes: >In article <1278@cbnews.ATT.COM> wbt@cbnews(William B. Thacker) writes: >>one closed-minded fundamentalist finding out that 12-year-olds with >>computers and modems can get access to alt.sex, soc.motss, soc.women, >>and other "adult theme" groups. > >Soc.women?! Soc.motss?! You're kidding, right? What do you think goes >on there? There's a big difference between the restriction of pornography >and the restriction of information. Who is going to be in charge of determining what is or is not pornography?? I've never seen anything in soc.motss that I would consider offensive. On the other hand, I've seen very little in there that my mother would NOT consider offensive. Who makes the rules??? Recent Virginia laws make it a serious offense for a store to sell materials that are LATER found to be "obscene". A simple extension of that law would be: "Oops, your public access Unix machine has an article, posted two weeks ago, that we found to be obscene today. We'll confiscate the machine." Scary, huh? -- - Aliza (AlmostLady) (decuac.dec.com!c3pe!aliza or backbone!decuac!c3pe!aliza) Life's a bitch... and so am I