Supreme Court Decision in the Communications Decency Act (CDA)

RawAlex · 2006-03-21, 06:17 PM

Miller sucks, but this confirms that it isn't going to go away. Think of it as a sort of dirt basement for defining obscenity. It isn't a safety net, but it does define limits that even the DoJ can't get around.

I am more interested to see someone attempt to use Miller by defining the internet as a community, and that what is available on the internet is in fact this community's standard. I don't think anyone has actually gone down this road, but I think it might be a very interesting twist in the game.

Alex

MrYum · 2006-03-21, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Miller sucks, but this confirms that it isn't going to go away. Think of it as a sort of dirt basement for defining obscenity. It isn't a safety net, but it does define limits that even the DoJ can't get around.

I am more interested to see someone attempt to use Miller by defining the internet as a community, and that what is available on the internet is in fact this community's standard. I don't think anyone has actually gone down this road, but I think it might be a very interesting twist in the game.

Alex

That's a VERY interesting twist Alex! Agreed, would love to see someone take that angle and see how it plays out

Maj. Stress · 2006-03-21, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

I am more interested to see someone attempt to use Miller by defining the internet as a community, and that what is available on the internet is in fact this community's standard. I don't think anyone has actually gone down this road, but I think it might be a very interesting twist in the game.

I think the case in Florida with the guy giving free porn passes to servicemen was headed that way before they took a plea bargain. I didn't hear "Miller" specifically but his attorney did mention something about local community standards not applying to the internet since it's a community within itself.

Bill · 2006-03-22, 07:18 PM

Boing Boing has an entry today on this:

http://www.boingboing.net/2006/03/21...al_materi.html

Online sexual material is obscene if any community in US objects

The Supreme Court of the United States has declined to overturn an important case about obscenity and the Internet, leaving anyone who publishes sexual material on the Internet in uncertainty about whether they're open to federal penalties.

By turning down this case, the Supremes have said that the whole country is now subject to the decency standards from its most conservative, anti-sex, anti-nudity corners; that the local standard from that place will become the national standard.

2006-03-21, 06:17 PM	#1
RawAlex Took the hint. Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,597	Miller sucks, but this confirms that it isn't going to go away. Think of it as a sort of dirt basement for defining obscenity. It isn't a safety net, but it does define limits that even the DoJ can't get around. I am more interested to see someone attempt to use Miller by defining the internet as a community, and that what is available on the internet is in fact this community's standard. I don't think anyone has actually gone down this road, but I think it might be a very interesting twist in the game. Alex

2006-03-22, 07:18 PM	#4
Bill Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip! Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,914	Boing Boing has an entry today on this: http://www.boingboing.net/2006/03/21...al_materi.html Online sexual material is obscene if any community in US objects The Supreme Court of the United States has declined to overturn an important case about obscenity and the Internet, leaving anyone who publishes sexual material on the Internet in uncertainty about whether they're open to federal penalties. By turning down this case, the Supremes have said that the whole country is now subject to the decency standards from its most conservative, anti-sex, anti-nudity corners; that the local standard from that place will become the national standard.