Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!apple!voder!kontron!optilink!cramer
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Net.Porn ?
Keywords: porn, underage, lawsuit
Message-ID: <550@optilink.UUCP>
Date: 6 Oct 88 16:42:48 GMT
References: <1278@cbnews.ATT.COM> <509@optilink.UUCP> <1957@spdcc.COM> <15023@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Distribution: na
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA
Lines: 63

In article <15023@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, gsmith@garnet.berkeley.edu (Gene W. Smith) writes:
> In article <541@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink (Clayton Cramer) writes:
> 
> >Mr. Dyer seems to be confusing what I'm saying could happen, with what
> >I personally believe.  I want you to picture a jury in a small town in
> >the MidWest (or even California) when the plaintiff's attorney explains
> >that soc.motss is a place where homosexuals socialize and discuss
> >aspects of being homosexual, and that SiteX BBS service provides
> >access to such by impressionable children.
> 
>   But why is it that you think your net.scribblings are protected
> in some way which Dyer & Company does not enjoy? And why are you

Note that I am distinguishing between what IS, and what SHOULD.  At
least since Gitlow vs. New York (1925), political speech has been
recognized as a protected form of free speech.  Over the last 25 years,
pornography, erotica, or whatever term you wish to use to describe
sexually-oriented materials, has NOT enjoyed the same protections of
the courts.  I'm not saying this is right -- because I don't think
this distinction is right -- just that the potential for legal
problems is signficant.

> so concerned about soc.motss in particular? I don't see why
> *this* group is especially likely to cause problems, whereas
> talk.religion.newage, or rec.games.frp, or even ca.politics are
> somehow clearly not a potential problem. Your answer "my ravings
> are protected by the first amendment, but Dyer's aren't" is both
> wrong and irrelevant.

I'm not concerned about soc.motss in particular -- alt.sex is likely
to cause the same problems.  Mr. Dyer took exception to my including
soc.motss in the same list.

And you are wrong -- political free speech is COMPLETELY protected --
there is no serious possibility of getting yourself in trouble carrying
political materials.

>   While Berkeley is clearly not a hick town in the sense you are
> seeking, it might be instructive to look at what Momma's little
> darling can lay his hands on here. First, right here on campus a
> free gay newspaper (sometimes another) is distributed. Also,

Distribution to college students isn't the same as distribution to
minors.

> People's World and the Militant and propaganda publications of
> the Soviet Union are sometimes distributed for free. For 75 cents

Completely protected -- I'm sure that an attempt to sue for providing
Communist materials to minors would be laughed out of court.

> Junior can buy The Spectator out of a newsstand, with every kink
> known to man or dog on the inside. Soc.motss? Don't make me
> laugh.
> --
> ucbvax!garnet!gsmith       Gene Ward Smith/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720

Berkeley isn't typical of American cities -- it's not even typical of
California cities.

-- 
Clayton E. Cramer
..!ames!pyramid!kontron!optilin!cramer