Forum Moderators: open
The inauguration of President George W. Bush and the likely confirmation of John Ashcroft as Attorney General have antipornography forces rejoicing and adult-site operators nervous.
[url=http://www.zdnet.com/intweek/stories/news/0,4164,2676270,00.html]http://www.zdnet.com/intweek/stories/news/0,4164,2676270,00.html[/url
Do you guys think we will ever have a Libertarian President. Both the Dems and Reps always want to push an ideological structure on to people 'for their own good'. Fortunately, they are always too busy arguing with each other to get anything done.
Here is a good link on the subject:
http //www.adultweblaw.com/laws/obscene.htm
And the Supreme Court Obscenity Definition
1) A thing must be prurient in nature
2) A thing must be completely devoid of scientific, political, educational, or social value
3) A thing must violate the local community standards
If it meets all three of these things, it is obscenity.
How is that for vague?
Edited by: grnidone
Littleman the vagueness of the definition sounds like someone who was tring to be a politian. The Search engines should decide what porn spam is, but the reality of that is slim fat and none. Porn is probably one of the most searched for keywords so the more sites that are on there engine the more traffic and the more visited the engines are. So its just good business to keep the Porn on the engines.
They make money hand over fist, and while it is a competitive market, they wouldn't have to deal with the legal hassles of people who weren't supposed to go to their sites anyway. They could then put the blame back onto parents of minors, etc. "We are an XXX domain, and they should screen that out."
It is not like they are hurting for consumers.
-G