From: Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 95 18:57:54 PST
To: Samuel Kaplin <skaplin@mirage.skypoint.com>
Subject: Re: EPIC to Debate Exon on CNN
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.91.950213174509.24624A-100000@mirage.skypoint.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950213215125.2820B-100000@panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




On Mon, 13 Feb 1995, Samuel Kaplin wrote:

> Senator Exon was much more convincing than Mr. Rotenberg. :( Why didn't
> EPIC field someone with better debating skills? A sellout was offered a 
> la EFF and DT. Mr. Rotenberg seemed ill prepared and not really 
> interested in the issue. This is not a good omen. The perseption left in 
> my non-internet literate wife was that the INTERNET=smut. :(
> 

I assume that Rotenberg was trying to do one thing only which was to try 
and get Exon to state that his bill did not cover ISPs.  He succeeded.  
He was not trying in 5 minutes to score debating points along the lines 
of "pornography, smut, indecency, sex, violence, rapine, and slaughter 
are perfectly legal so long as they do not rise to the level of legal 
obscenity."  That's just the sort of argument that gets the audience to 
think you're nuts and ignore you.  

If the bill doesn't cover ISPs, it is meaningless.  He never actually 
*said* he'd work with Exon.  You have to be very careful on these shows.  
He could, perhaps, have done a little better, but I detected no sellout.

DCF