Slashdot Mirror


Bill Would Extend Online Obscenity Laws to Blogs, Mailing Lists

Erris writes "Senator John McCain has proposed a bill to extend federal obscenity reporting guidelines to all forms of internet communications. Those who fail to report according to guidelines could face fines of up to $300,000 for unreported posts to a blog or mailing list. The EFF was quick to slam the proposal, saying that this was the very definition of 'slippery slope', and citing the idea of 'personal common carrier'." From the article: "These types of individuals or businesses would be required to file reports: any Web site with a message board; any chat room; any social-networking site; any e-mail service; any instant-messaging service; any Internet content hosting service; any domain name registration service; any Internet search service; any electronic communication service; and any image or video-sharing service."

13 of 443 comments (clear)

  1. What's that smell in the air? by TheGreek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why, I think you're right! It's the 2008 Panderfest beginning!

  2. John McCain loses more of my respect every day by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    You know, back when he was first running for President--with his candor, his willingness to take on members of his own party, his "straight talk express" relationship with the public and the press--I had a lot of repsect for this guy. I was a Democrat and even *I* would have voted for him if he had won the primary.

    But in the years since, he has squandered it all. He has sucked up to the very President who had slurred him viciously here in South Carolina. He has cow-towed to the religious right. He has supported a war that he knew damn well was a bad move, for his own political ends. And, most telling of all, he caved-in on the one issue that I would have NEVER thought that he (of all people) would have caved on--torture of detainees.

    So this move doesn't really surpsise me. He has become a political whore, nothing more. He's not even worthy of spitting on anymore, much less voting for.

    -Eric

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:John McCain loses more of my respect every day by PingSpike · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Exactly what I was going to say. I was really hoping he won the primaries back in 2000 because I was really excited about him as a canidate. But now he just disgusts me.

      Between this and his flag burning its clear he's just another tool without any conviction at all. And between this and the flag burning amendment he's becoming quite the opponent of freedom of speech. And thats a position that I just plain can't ever get behind.

  3. Anti obscenity laws? by EvilCabbage · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, holy titty fucking christ.

  4. What obscenity? by Bob+Gelumph · · Score: 5, Funny

    There is no fucking obscenity on message boards.
    What kind of cunts out there think there's fucking obscenity on the net?
    What a bunch of donkey-raping shit-eaters!
    What the fuck is the matter with the U.S. government's retarded-puppy-raping legislators?
    Obscenity on the internet... Sometimes, I tell you... Jesus baby-fucking Christ that's preposterous...

    --
    I'm gonna need a spec.
  5. he wants obscenity reported? by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He wants obscenity reported? Please report to him that the following message was posted:

    (The easily offended should skip the rest of this post.)

    (Last chance to look away...)

    Fuck Senator John McCain. Fuck him up the ass hard with a big thick dildo with built-in violet wand until the santorum runs down his legs. Tie him down and fuck him and give him the golden shower he wants and deserves, until he admits his wretchedness, admits what a bootlicker he is, admits that he gets off on being a slave, because he can't handle freedom.

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood
  6. Re:Actually by IdleTime · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Every time I hear the "uproar" against "obscenity", I hear the sound of silence over the real problems.

    - Over 12 million living in poverty
    - 40-50 million without health care
    - 25% of the worlds prison population
    - 46800 car deaths in 2005
    - Every 90-second a car is colliding with a train due to lacking regulations if crossing.
    - Higher education costs and arm and a leg and your first born.

    This country has some serious problems to deal with, but obscenity is not one of them!

    --
    If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
  7. Well, if this passes... by JayBlalock · · Score: 5, Insightful
    No more public discussion on American servers on the Internet.

    Seriously, who would risk running a public forum in the face of fines like that? Even major players like Amazon would most likely be forced to take down public comment sections lest something slip through. Slashdot, Fark, Kos, Pandagon, Redstate, LGF, whatever your online bitching kink is, it's going away.

    And suddenly Americans would have to go onto foreign servers just to find a forum to exercise their free speech rights.

    See, here's what REALLY pisses me off. McCain isn't stupid. He's many things (repeating many of which, at this point, could possibly get me jailed), but stupid is not one of them. Either he's offering up this bill with no intention of seeing it passed, or he recognizes the death of free speech on the American internet as an acceptible price to pay for his rise to power.

    Every time I see a bill like this, I grow a little less convinced that there's any way we'll be able to reclaim our government from these assholes.

    --
    Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
  8. Actual Bill by Changer2002 · · Score: 5, Informative

    While I still think this is a bad idea, the bill is directed towards child pornography, not obscenity in general. Also, according to the bill there would be a duty to report if the administrator obtained actual knowledge that child pornography was posted online. I didn't read the bill over in great detail but I didn't see anything about an affirmative duty to monitor, just report when something is brought to your attention. Still it sets a bad precedent and I'm disappointed in McCain who I've always supported.

  9. Huh? by cje · · Score: 5, Informative

    McCain has an 85% strong conservative voting record. How in the world does that make him "far left"? Speaking from the left, I can tell you: We don't want him.

    --
    We're going down, in a spiral to the ground
  10. Re:hahaha by Nasarius · · Score: 5, Informative
    Browse through PollingReport some time.
    • 53-39 pro-choice
    • about 60% for universal health care (and years ago)
    • 50-37 for stem cell research
    • 57-35 favor the environment over economic growth
    • 54% favor stricter gun control laws
    • 49-43 favor affirmative action
    • 56-39 are against privatization of Social Security (various questions, same overall picture)
    • 60% favor withdrawal from Iraq in six months

    Tell me again how the public loves far-right ideas? On issues without broad public support, it's our responsibility to lead social change. The Dems don't pander to the base. They're to the right of the fucking majority of Americans on many issues!
    --
    LOAD "SIG",8,1
  11. Damned if you do, damned if you don't by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A while back, right here on Slashdot, a porn hosting webmaster posted a relevant comment.

    Every now and then, somebody would set up a website on their system and upload kiddy porn.

    He tried being a good citizen and reporting it. Several times. The authorities didn't follow up, they simply made angry threats to arrest him.

    His company now silently deletes kiddy porn sites.

    Playing devil's advocate, though, how is this proposal different from the existing legislation that requires health care providers to report suspected child abuse?

  12. Re:hahaha by fyngyrz · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Marriage is a religious institution and the state has no business being involved.

    Marriage was around long before any of the major religions of today (Islam, Christianity) and served as a political bond joining property and fortune well before Christ, Mohammed, or Zeus. Religion may want to co-opt marriage (and I can certainly understand why, it's a control mechanism similar to, and related to, sexual control) but history doesn't support the claim that marriage is religious.

    As for the government's interest, this is relatively natural: When you join in property, medical and fiscal responsibility, residence, and income, only a perfect government would be able to keep its hot little hands out of the pot. And hoo boy, is our government not perfect!

    Religion's no better. As soon as sexuality and joining come into it, next thing you know there is some person trying to tell you exactly how you should be managing your affairs. One wife, not two. Opposite sex partners only. This age disparity, and no more. This color, and not that. This religion, and not another. History supports a much wider set of joinings, and for very good reason -- they're perfectly natural.

    So to your idea of religion having all there is to say about marriage, I say, "take off, eh?" Marriage should be what the partners (2...n) say it is, and the rest of us should respect that. It should not be subject to Christian or Muslim or even ancient Greek sensibilities. When people want to join together and seek their fortune and lives together the rest of us have only one job: Get the heck out of the way.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.