From: "Mr. Nobody" <mixmaster@anon.alias.net>William Bennet <x@x.x>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 96 14:57:47 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: None
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9601091009.F11357-0100000@griffin.emba.uvm.edu>
Message-ID: <199601112245.QAA00505@fuqua.fiftysix.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


In article <wkwdZSi00YUvI3q_gr@andrew.cmu.edu> "Declan B. McCullagh" <declan+@CMU.EDU> writes:

> From: "Declan B. McCullagh" <declan+@CMU.EDU>
> Date: Tue,  9 Jan 1996 11:35:42 -0500 (EST)
> X-From-Line: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com  Tue Jan  9 11:53:19 1996
> References: <Pine.3.89.9601091009.F11357-0100000@griffin.emba.uvm.edu>
> Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
> Precedence: bulk
> Lines: 46
> 
> * INDECENCY is illegal to *broadcast* under Federal law, as enforced by
> the FCC. Examples of indecent words include "fuck" and "cocksucker,"
> which the Supreme Court has defined as illegal in the George Carlin
> speech, Pacifica case. The justification for a compelling government
> interest is that radio waves are pervasive, and a child can turn on the
> radio and hear dirty words by accident. The great free speech attorney
> Harvey Silverglate has been representing Alan Ginsberg in an "indecency"
> case, since "Howl" contains "indecent" words -- I believe he managed to
> get the FCC to include an exemption for material broadcast after
> midnight.

Isn't a large part of the reason the FCC can regulate broadcasters
without violating the first ammendment the fact that there are only a
finite number of broadcast frequencies, and that TV/radio stations are
required to serve the public interest?  I don't see how the same login
can be applied to the internet.