RSS
Twitter
Supreme Court Appeal For Communications Decency Act
from the the-next-big-legal-case dept
Seth Finkelstein writes "The Nitke v. Gonzales case, which challenges the conflict between obscenity, "community standards", and the Internet, is being appealed to the Supreme Court, in response to an unfavorable lower court ruling. 'The CDA contains provisions that ban speech and images from the Internet that any local community in the U.S. could deem obscene, even though that speech would be fully protected elsewhere. The CDA also contains a provision that states that it's illegal to put any obscene material on the web in such a way that minors can access it. However since the Internet can be accessed by anyone with a computer, anything on the web can be accessed by a minor as previously held by the Supreme Court in Reno v. ACLU.'"
Reader Comments
(Flattened / Threaded)
No Subject Given
I'm not a lawyer, but isn't the person viewing the banned content the criminal?
If something is banned in my home town, and I drive to another state (or country) get the banned item and bring it back to my town, how is that the sellers fault?
Same with minors. Seems like the person providing them with access to the internet is responsible for what they atre viewing, not seller of legal content.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment