Are we asking for trouble?

RawAlex · 2003-09-04, 12:30 PM

Surfn: I appreciate your non-rant. I appreciate also your point of view, and technically, you are quite correct. However, a short story will explain to you better some of the things I have seen and why I think that in practical terms, you are not correct.

I have certain friends and aquaintances in the US that are very much first amendment advocates (to the extreme). They see it not only as the right to free speech, but a challenge to make sure they get as much of that free speech in any time they can. One of them gets his jollies by writing to newspapers, congressmen, state senators, and anyone else he can find and giving them a piece of his mind (the funny part is, when a newspaper prints one of his letters to the editors, he calls it "publishing his column", like he has some expectation that they WANT his opinion for anything more than to fill space on the op-ed pages).

He has gotten involved in a number of business and situations that require he deal with the government, officials, and such, and at each time, he has been targetted (his words) by the people attempting to surpress his views, to limit his freedom of speech and expression.

I have yet to be able to convince him that his bullheaded attachment to freedom of speech means that the bullheaded people attempting to control or restrict the things he wants to do will fight back as hard as he pulls at it.

While technically, we should never give in, we should protect our rights to the words we want to use, and we should be able to describe consentual acts between adults in any way we want.

Realistically, your going to look stupid in court, trying to protect a site called "a boy's first time" or "young girls first orgasm". You will probably lose, and more importantly, our industry will once again look like a group of perverted child molestors and sickos.

The bozo charged with redirecting typos is being singled out BECAAUSE HE REDIRECTED THE STUFF TO PORN. If he had mousetrapped them into amazon.com's toy section, or to the front door of a PPC search engine for non-adult stuff, there would be no outcry, no bullshit, no crap - and probably no charges.

Technically, it is a double standard. In reality, smart business people can see this and avoid it like the plague!

Alex

2003-09-04, 12:30 PM	#8
RawAlex Took the hint. Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,597	Surfn: I appreciate your non-rant. I appreciate also your point of view, and technically, you are quite correct. However, a short story will explain to you better some of the things I have seen and why I think that in practical terms, you are not correct. I have certain friends and aquaintances in the US that are very much first amendment advocates (to the extreme). They see it not only as the right to free speech, but a challenge to make sure they get as much of that free speech in any time they can. One of them gets his jollies by writing to newspapers, congressmen, state senators, and anyone else he can find and giving them a piece of his mind (the funny part is, when a newspaper prints one of his letters to the editors, he calls it "publishing his column", like he has some expectation that they WANT his opinion for anything more than to fill space on the op-ed pages). He has gotten involved in a number of business and situations that require he deal with the government, officials, and such, and at each time, he has been targetted (his words) by the people attempting to surpress his views, to limit his freedom of speech and expression. I have yet to be able to convince him that his bullheaded attachment to freedom of speech means that the bullheaded people attempting to control or restrict the things he wants to do will fight back as hard as he pulls at it. While technically, we should never give in, we should protect our rights to the words we want to use, and we should be able to describe consentual acts between adults in any way we want. Realistically, your going to look stupid in court, trying to protect a site called "a boy's first time" or "young girls first orgasm". You will probably lose, and more importantly, our industry will once again look like a group of perverted child molestors and sickos. The bozo charged with redirecting typos is being singled out BECAAUSE HE REDIRECTED THE STUFF TO PORN. If he had mousetrapped them into amazon.com's toy section, or to the front door of a PPC search engine for non-adult stuff, there would be no outcry, no bullshit, no crap - and probably no charges. Technically, it is a double standard. In reality, smart business people can see this and avoid it like the plague! Alex