1996-03-16 - Re: FCC-type Regulation of Cyberspace

Header Data

From: “Declan B. McCullagh” <declan+@CMU.EDU>
To: jamesd@echeque.com
Message Hash: 2ee951e8c1bf2cf609dcfbfc1b830b6b4425667feecdc77053a7d1ded550638e
Message ID: <klGSI7i00YUv4VNsFc@andrew.cmu.edu>
Reply To: <199603151625.IAA21520@mail1.best.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-03-16 00:15:09 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 08:15:09 +0800

Raw message

From: "Declan B. McCullagh" <declan+@CMU.EDU>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 08:15:09 +0800
To: jamesd@echeque.com
Subject: Re: FCC-type Regulation of Cyberspace
In-Reply-To: <199603151625.IAA21520@mail1.best.com>
Message-ID: <klGSI7i00YUv4VNsFc@andrew.cmu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 15-Mar-96 Re: FCC-type Regulation of
.. by jamesd@echeque.com 
> Bill Frantz wrote:
> >Political speech, not commercial speech.  The act doesn't apply or is
> >unconstitutional.
>  
> I see:  The bill of rights reads: 
> "Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of *political*
> speech".   
> Never knew that until now. 

Thanks for clarifying. Now I know that Congress can pass a law muzzling
the New York Times Co., Inc.

More seriously, society accepts greater limitations on commercial
speech, and I don't find them nearly as odious as I do ones that
restrict political speech.

-Declan






Thread