At 11:59 -0400 9/19/00, Matt Elliott wrote:
>>would not affect my position one bit. These people have the right
>>for their information to be put into the public forum.
>
>One small correction Kevin, they have the right to put their information
>into their own public forum. I don't have to allow them to put their
>information in my newspaper or allow their bits to travel across sections
>of the Internet that I own. I don't have to make it easy for them to
>spread their nonsense.
Oh yeah, now things get interesting. The issue of allowing such
things in your newspaper is a problem you have with your newspaper,
not them. If you don't like what your newspaper publishes complain
to it, not to NAMBLA. The ISP issue is similar. I don't have a
problem with an organization controlling the material it carries, BUT
I have a serious problem with organizations-
A. Not making the fact they do such things VERY clear in their user
agreement, etc.
OR
B. Changing said agreement depending on which way the wind blows.
Their is also a legal issue here that is worth mentioning. An ISP
deciding to censor/filter traffic based on content potentially opens
that ISP to serious legal risk. As long as an ISP acts as a simple
bit shuffler their liability for user activity is tiny. They enjoy
the same status as the telephone company (that of a common carrier)
and thus have no responsibility for the traffic they carry. The
moment the step over that line and begin to monitor said traffic they
can no longer claim to be a common carrier. I believe their was an
interesting case several years ago where an ISP in the Eastern US was
held liable for pornographic material stored on one of there news
servers, specifically because they had taken action in the past to
remove such material.
Regardless however, all such activities to restrict traffic ought to
be done by contacting the individuals and/or organizations
responsible (either carriers or originators), not by running to big
momma government and whining about how such talk disturbs you. Using
the government and specifically the judiciary as a big cudgel to beat
people who's opinion you disagree with into submission is morally
reprehensible. People who abuse government in such a way ought to be
shunned with the same venom typically reserved for pedophiles and
persons of similar ilk.
--
Kevin "The Cubbie" Elliott
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ#23758827
_______________________________________________________________________________
"As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both
instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly
unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware
of change in the air--however slight--lest we become unwitting
victims of the darkness."
-- Justice William O. Douglas
