From: Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 12:29:01 +0800
To: cypherpunks@EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer)
Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd)
Message-ID: <199706050354.WAA04800@einstein.ssz.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text



Hi,

Forwarded message:

> From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@amaranth.com>
> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 22:31:07 -0500
> Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd)

> I as Joe Sixpack want to goto http://www.bigtits.com
> 
> You as goodie-2-shoes want to picket this site.
> 
> Inorder to do this you wish to have me goto http://www.NOW.com and see
> their anti-porn page before I can see the bigtits page. (wether I actually
> goto their website or the page is automatically downloaded is irrelevant
> for the disscusion).

Not exactly, I am saying it would be legaly permissible under the same chain
of reasoning that allows picketing at a public sidewalk in front of a
business to extend it to network traffic which traversed a public link in
the chain of nodes between user and server. I am in effect saying the
end point publicly funded servers on a section of publicly funded network,
not the user or the actual target server (who again have no more stake in
this than in an actual picket line - none), would be required to provide
3rd party single pages before serving the actual target of the user based
upon the same sorts of situations that arise in meatland.

Is that clearer?

> Where exactly is it in the constution that say that your free speech
> rights extend to the point where you can force me to read what you have to
> say when I don't want to?

The 1st Amendment, when you are traversing public property, be it a sidewalk
or stretch of network cable. It is simply a matter of strategy and geography
if for you to get to where you want to go you have to go through public
property on which I desire to speak. Neither you nor your intended
destination has anything to say about it.

> I just don't see how you can make this leap regardless of who is doing the
> funding.

Then you don't understand how picketing works. To get to the private store
you must cross public property. The public is free to use that property to
their own ends within the law. The law allows, through the 1st Amendment,
anyone to stand on that public stip and make certain claims about adjacent
private parties. Hell, you can legaly picket a private individuals house as
long as you do it from the sidewalk - which by extension means that they
could specificaly picket your personal server if they desired as long as
they did it from a publicly funded stretch of network.

> I'll leave the numerous analogies alone for a latter post. I just don't
> see where anyone has the right to tell me what I must read.

As long as you are not using everybody elses money (ie public funds) to get
there they don't. But your not wanting to see the picketers in front of
Bookstop on the sidewalk in no way impacts their right to be there and your
total impunity to do anything about it legaly short of picketing yourself.

   _______________________________________________________________________
  |                                                                       |
  |            Speak the truth, but leave immediately after.              |
  |                                                                       |
  |                                     Slovenian Proverb                 |
  |                                                                       |
  |     Jim Choate                                 ravage@ssz.com         |
  |     The Armadillo Group                        www.ssz.com            |
  |     Austin, Texas, USA                         512-451-7087           |
  |_______________________________________________________________________|