[53320] in Cypherpunks
Re: PICS required by laws
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Declan B. McCullagh)
Sat Apr 6 02:26:39 1996
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 02:03:53 -0500 (EST)
From: "Declan B. McCullagh" <declan+@CMU.EDU>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com, "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Cc: sethf@MIT.EDU, beeson@aclu.org
In-Reply-To: <01I36YAYMC3K8ZE63H@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
The ACLU is taking the right position here, IMHO. But I sense no
consensus from the coalition of groups in the CDA challenge.
-Declan
Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 5-Apr-96 PICS required by law by "E.
ALLEN SMITH"@ocelot.
> What was I saying a while back about mandatory PICS through
liability?
>
> As I recall, various people such as TCMay were saying that it wouldn't
happen.
>
> Looks like I need to get out that article against PICS that I was working on
> and rewrite it a bit. I would remind people that PICS allows parents (or
> whoever else is holding the reins, such as an ISP - or the Chinese
firewall) t
> o
> filter on such content as material (including scientific studies)
stating that
>
> a given illegal drug is not as harmful as some would claim, any idea futures
> market - even a simulated one, on homosexual content separately from
> heterosexual, and against criticisms of religions (such as Scientology). To
> their credit, the ACLU (in the CDA court case) has stated that they will not
> put a PICS rating on their web site, even if it contains "indecent" or
> allegedly "harmful to minors" material. I agree strongly with their position.
