Xref: utzoo comp.misc:4811 news.groups:7045 news.admin:4558
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ncis.llnl.gov!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ames!pacbell!att!cuuxb!dlm
From: dlm@cuuxb.ATT.COM (Dennis L. Mumaugh)
Newsgroups: comp.misc,news.groups,news.admin
Subject: Re: USSR International Computer Club (was: Information on the ICC)
Keywords: illegal activities
Message-ID: <2421@cuuxb.ATT.COM>
Date: 25 Jan 89 16:58:32 GMT
References: <825@afit-ab.arpa> <24302@apple.Apple.COM> <2393@cuuxb.ATT.COM> <5735@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Reply-To: dlm@cuuxb.UUCP (Dennis L. Mumaugh)
Organization: ATT Data Systems Group, Lisle, Ill.
Lines: 44

In article <5735@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> vnend@phoenix.Princeton.EDU 
(D. W. James) writes:
> In article <2393@cuuxb.ATT.COM> dlm@cuuxb.UUCP (Dennis L. Mumaugh) writes:
> )[Not that it is true but much of alt.sex is illegal and considered 
> )obscene by several states.]
> 
> 	Can you provide evidence to back this up, both parts?  I just
> recently looked into alt.sex for the first time since its creation,
> and havn't seen anything that would be either (though the obscene
> part is admittedly *very* much open to debate.)  But I haven't seen
> anything that could be construed as illegal per se...
> 

My comment was in reference to several things.  It is illegal to
allow persons under 18 access to "pornography".  Hence, per se,
alt.sex is "illegal" if a person under 18 has access.  Datum: how
many University undergraduates are under 18?  How many university
machines that support the undergraduate comp sci 1A have alt.sex?

The US of A has laws prohibiting "pornography" involving
"children" under 18.  This has been construed [in one case] to
include a father taking the picture of his 18 month old child in
the nude.  Hence, if an article on alt.sex talks about two
teenagers boinking that can be construed to be illegal per se.

Also, some states consider various explicit descriptions
"illegal".  Also, Canada has some rather harsh laws regarding
importation of "obscene material".  In this sense alt.sex could
be so considered.

Then of course, there is the S&M digest. {It IS rot13 but that's
a minor point}.

Some countries have laws that prohibit encyphered communications.
Technically rot13 is a cipher.

Of course, none of the above has ever met a recent court
challenge and "Free Speech" considerations are very much
involved.  The point is that only one crusading States Attorney
or southren[sic] High Sheriff[sic] is all that is required to
make a stink.
-- 
=Dennis L. Mumaugh
 Lisle, IL       ...!{att,lll-crg}!cuuxb!dlm  OR cuuxb!dlm@arpa.att.com