Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Internet Regulation Proposed

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the i-do-love-a-good-fight dept.

bumgutts writes "Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has suggested a mandatory website self-rating system. The system, very similar to one suggested under Clinton's administration, would require by law all commercial websites to place 'marks and notices' on each page containing 'sexually explicit' content, with penalty up to 5 years imprisonment." From the article: "A second new crime would threaten with imprisonment Web site operators who mislead visitors about sex with deceptive 'words or digital images' in their source code--for instance, a site that might pop up in searches for Barbie dolls or Teletubbies but actually features sexually explicit photographs. A third new crime appears to require that commercial Web sites not post sexually explicit material on their home page if it can be seen 'absent any further actions by the viewer.'"

2 of 429 comments (clear)

  1. TESTICLE ROT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    poo

  2. The legal implications of the word by NZheretic · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    Fuck
    By Christopher M. Fairman, Ohio State Moritz College of Law
    You can download the paper from here
    ABSTRACT:
    This Article is as simple and provocative as its title suggests: it explores the legal implications of the word fuck. The intersection of the word fuck and the law is examined in four major areas: First Amendment, broadcast regulation, sexual harassment, and education. The legal implications from the use of fuck vary greatly with the context. To fully understand the legal power of fuck, the nonlegal sources of its power are tapped. Drawing upon the research of etymologists, linguists, lexicographers, psychoanalysts, and other social scientists, the visceral reaction to fuck can be explained by cultural taboo. Fuck is a taboo word. The taboo is so strong that it compels many to engage in self-censorship. This process of silence then enables small segments of the population to manipulate our rights under the guise of reflecting a greater community. Taboo is then institutionalized through law, yet at the same time is in tension with other identifiable legal rights. Understanding this relationship between law and taboo ultimately yields fuck jurisprudence.

    SUBJECT AREA:
    Communications Law; Constitutional Law; Education Law; Employment Practice; Psychology and Psychiatry; Sexuality and the Law

    SUGGESTED CITATION:
    Christopher M. Fairman, "Fuck" (March 7, 2006). ExpressO Preprint Series. Working Paper 1087.
    http://law.bepress.com/expresso/eps/1087