Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!turtlevax!weitek!robert
From: robert@weitek.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.news
Subject: Re: Towards making hosts and their admin free from a criminal offence
Message-ID: <434@weitek.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-May-86 13:43:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: weitek.434
Posted: Fri May 30 13:43:57 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Jun-86 09:47:33 EDT
References: <611@bu-cs.UUCP> <164@comp.lancs.ac.uk> <20663@styx.UUCP> <1261@mulga.OZ>
Distribution: net
Organization: Weitek Corp. Sunnyvale Ca.
Lines: 53
Summary: Big Brother May or May Not be Watching You

In article <1261@mulga.OZ>, isaac@mulga.OZ (Isaac Balbin) writes:
> In article <2026@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU> jbs@mit-eddie.UUCP (Jeff Siegal) writes:
> ... Would you consider say a racist article a `free exchange of ideas'?

Of course.  The MEANING of the term "free exchange" means that it's
not subject to censorship, which in turn implies that it allows
unfashionable, outdated, stupid, and nasty ideas.

> Who is to decide that say, the `jive' program posted to net.sources recently
> is/is not racist? The point I am making is does the definition of 
> `free exchange of ideas' allow you to print *anything*.

Yes. Though if you libel someone you may be liable for civil damages,
in a free country there is no prior restraint on publishing.  There
have been cases in the U.S. where prior restraint has been used, but
it's hard to do (because it's blatantly unconstitutional).

> That was what I originally wanted. Would then the "Do you understand if you
> violate any local law in posting this article that *you* are responsible?"
> question in postnews, Pnews be a solution? I don't accept the
> view that people will just get used to it and type "yes". If they are 
> lax in reading what they sign it is their responsibility again.
> 				Isaac Balbin.

It certainly doesn't address the problem of people in free countries
posting anything they want, with careless disregard for the
fascist attitudes of some countries on the net, and the effect it may
have on the net there. It certainly doesn't violate any *local* laws
for me to heckle the Iranian government, although doing so in Iran
might be dangerous. Nor am I going to limit my postings to the least
common denominator of allowable topics in all countries on the net.

For that matter, I have no idea what kinds of topics individual
countries are censoring this week.  What topics are taboo in
Australia? Japan? England? Barsoom? It won't keep me from posting,
but it might cause me to put "Illegal to Read in Barsoom" or
"Barsoomians Must Join the Free World Before Reading" on the subject
line.

(Or, better yet, "Barsoomians: Tired of your worn-out, old-fashioned
government? Replace it with a free society and read all the trash you
want without guilt or fear! Only $9.95 buys you a Liberty Cap, a
photograph of Thomas Jefferson and a box full of inflammatory
pamphlets!")

-- 

	Robert Plamondon
	UUCP: {turtlevax, cae780}!weitek!robert
	FidoNet: 143/12 robert plamondon

	"You can't be too rich or too thin"
		-- Howard Hughes