From: Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 1997 12:45:09 -0800 (PST)
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Subject: Re: Report from Supreme Court on CDA arguments
In-Reply-To: <v03007814af562ae68de2@[168.161.105.191]>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970320124236.0062d868@popd.ix.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


One of the main arguments about technology for the good guys is that
the CDA's infringements on free speech are not the least restrictive
means for accomplishing their (claimed) objective - technology gives us
some options today (like censor-filters) - and advances in technology
_strengthen_ the pro-free-speech case, because they provide more alternatives
that are less restrictive than the censorship approach.

At 06:45 PM 3/19/97 -0500, Declan wrote:
>http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,744,00.html
>     Justice Scalia, who noted that he uses a
>computer, pointed out that technology is rapidly
>changing. "So much of your argument is based on
>what's currently available," he said to Ennis.
>"This technology is changing so quickly. Is it
>possible that this statute is unconstitutional
>now but could be [constitutional] in four or five
>years?" Ennis replied: "Not as it's written."
>
>     During a subsequent press conference, Ennis
>added that indeed, the technology is changing,
>and is giving parents more control over what
>their children do and see online. "Precisely
>because the technology is changing, the
>government should not be trying to enforce this
>law," he said. The ACLU attorneys who joined
>Ennis were grinning: the justices appeared to
>understand the nature of communications online,
>noted that teens have rights, and focused on free
>speech, not porn.


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts@ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#     (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)