From: Brian Davis <bdavis@thepoint.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 14:47:10 +0800
To: "Timothy C. May" <tcmay@got.net>
Subject: Re: SurfWatch
In-Reply-To: <ad67659f0b021004d8f2@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960310013511.12537I-100000@mercury.thepoint.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Sat, 9 Mar 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:

> ...
> In the terms of the lawyers--from what I picked up during my time on the
> Cyberial list--a requirement that words be rated before they can be
> distributed would not pass Constitutional muster. This does not mean that
> one's words will not trigger prosecutions, lawsuits, treason trials, etc.
> What it means is that "prior restraint" is frowned upon (recall "The
> Progressive" H-bomb case of about 15 years ago, where a court subjected
> this magazine to prior restraint...a rare occurrence, later overturned. A
> more recent case involves "Business Week," and is still unresolved).
...
The Sixth Circuit recently held that the prior restraint by the idiot 
district judge was wrong.

EBD