1995-02-08 - Re: Effects of S.314 (Communications Decency Act)

Header Data

From: “James A. Donald” <jamesd@netcom.com>
To: jpp@markv.com
Message Hash: 3e1fe563bdd43f0c3663a0525e065971ce9a905a4a8db4fccd59cce21b662310
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9502081213.A7848-0100000@netcom10>
Reply To: <9502072138.aa29510@hermix.markv.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-02-08 20:25:23 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 12:25:23 PST

Raw message

From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 12:25:23 PST
To: jpp@markv.com
Subject: Re: Effects of S.314 (Communications Decency Act)
In-Reply-To: <9502072138.aa29510@hermix.markv.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9502081213.A7848-0100000@netcom10>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Tue, 7 Feb 1995 jpp@markv.com wrote:
 
> Uh oh!  Egg on my face.  Will someone explain to me how the amendments
> in S.314 make owners of ISPs or other computer systems liable for
> 'bad' data?  I apologize for my previous uncalled for (so it seams to
> me now) ranting.


 (A) by striking out `telephone' in the matter above
        subparagraph (A) and inserting `telecommunications device'; 
 (B) by striking out `makes any comment, request,
        suggestion, or proposal' in subparagraph (A) and inserting
        `makes, transmits, or otherwise makes available any comment, request,
                ^^^^^^^^^^
         suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication'; 

This appears to make ISP's responsible for content.

It makes them responsible for something that they cannot 
control without violating people privacy.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          |  
We have the right to defend ourselves     |   http://www.catalog.com/jamesd/
and our property, because of the kind     |  
of animals that we are. True law          |   James A. Donald
derives from this right, not from the     |  
arbitrary power of the omnipotent state.  |   jamesd@netcom.com






Thread