See http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3675.txt.
Thanks, Donald ============================= Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street Milford, MA 01757 USA d3e...@gmail.com On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 6:21 PM, William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 5:43 PM, John R. Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote: >>> US Code TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 71 > § 1470 >>> http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00001470----000-.html >> >> That law includes the phrase "knowing that such other individual has not >> attained the age of 16 years." That's why porn sites have a home page that >> asks you how old you are. > > In court, willful negligence is generally the same thing as knowing. > > >> As far as I can tell from looking for case law, >> all the 1470 cases are basically child molestation cases where the 1470 >> count was piled on in addition to the real charges, unrelated to kids >> looking for porn sites. > > It gets messy because obscenity hinges on local community standards. > But that's the rub -- as a porn purveyor you can't know what the > community standards are in the user's community. Not many examples of > web sites being taken to task for web content, not yet, but lots of > examples of mail-order porn owners having a really bad year year, > legally speaking. > > >> So, in short, there's no problem for .XXX to solve. > > Suppose, just for the sake of the argument, that a statute or > precedent came about to the effect that a community which permits > access to .xxx sites (by not censoring the DNS) implicitly accepts > "that kind of thing" isn't obscenity under local law. Further, suppose > its found that the individual in such communities circumventing the > technical safeguards in place to censor his access to .xxx is solely > liable for such access, that the porn purveyor is -presumed- to have a > reasonable belief that said individual's activity was lawful... merely > because they access the site using the .xxx extension. > > Suppose, in other words, it comes to be that an internet porn purveyor > is protected from local community standards for obscenity so he need > only worry about staying away from stuff that's illegal in his own > back yard. Where the prosecution has to support a claim that the site > is accessible other than through the .xxx name in order to survive an > early motion to dismiss. > > -Bill > > > > > -- > William D. Herrin ................ her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us > 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> > Falls Church, VA 22042-3004 > >
