
By: LARRY SITES
Re: Fundi Censorship

Here's more details on the fundi ploy to limit free speech on the net so
they can without evidence offensively claim unbelievers are "sinners" who
will "go to hell" while preventing those with evidence to the contracy from
observing they are full of "shit" and can "fuck off". They have allready
gotten the term "fundi" deemed offensive on AOL where it's use will get
your account cancelled, and forced the San Diego Union Tribune to refuse
adult entertainment advertising. Speak up now or say goodby to HolySmoke
and hello to one nation under an imaginary god. You can save the rest to
your www reader and access the links on the web or get it at:

http://www.hotwired.com

HotWired and Wired Privacy Archive - "The Obscenity of Decency"
by Brock Meeks

The Obscenity of Decency

With the introduction of Senator James Exon's "Communications
Decency Act" (S 314), the barbarians really are at the gate.

Here's what you can do.

mailto:brock@well.sf.ca.us    -    Brock N. Meeks

Border skirmishes over First Amendment rights along the electronic frontier
have broken into a full-scale range war. A bill
gaining momentum in Congress threatens to impose government mandated
censorship on all forms of electronic speech, including your private
e-mail. If passed, this bill would cast a bone-deep chill across all
forms of online communication, reducing them to nothing more
thought-provoking than Hallmark greeting cards.  The "Communications
Decency Act," as the bill (S 314) is euphemistically called, was
introduced in February by Senators James Exon (D-Nebraska) and Slade
Gorton (R-Washington), apparently in an effort to save cyberspace from
becoming what the senators claim is a debaucherous haven for perverts
and pedophiles.

"I want to keep the information superhighway from resembling a
red-light district," Exon said when introducing the bill. "This
legislation will help stop those who electronically cruise the digital
universe to engage children in inappropriate communications."

What Exon doesn't tell you, however, is that the bill would slap
criminal liabilities on all Internet service providers, commercial
online services, bulletin board systems and even electronic mail
providers whenever their services are used to transmit any material
that's considered "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent." Oh
yeah, the person actually responsible for sending the message gets
hammered as well, with up to US$100,000 in fines and two years behind
bars.

But here's a small catch: Who decides the definition of those words?
The bill, not surprisingly, is silent on that issue.

"Obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent" speech via the
telephone is illegal, according the battle-scared Communications Act
of 1934, which Exon's bill would amend. Since the `30s, the courts
have narrowly interpreted the law, restricting the criminal penalties
to only nonconsensual speech.  But Exon's bill ups the ante
substantially. His bill would broaden the scope of the act by stating
that anyone who "makes, transmits, or otherwise makes available any
comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication"
that is "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent" using a
"telecommunications device" is a criminal.

The upshot: carriers of all types would be forced - or coerced,
depending on your point of view - to clamp down on their customer's
private and public comments, turning the companies into de facto
"speech police."  Heads up to America Online: under this bill, the
lusty and healthy sensual fantasy messages I sometimes send to my wife
via your e-mail service turns me into a criminal, dragging you along
for the ride to the cellblock.  An analysis of the bill, written for
the Electronic Messaging Association by lawyers James Bruce and
Richard Pfohl of Wiley, Rein & Fielding, a DC-based firm, says: "This
provision [of banning consensual sexually oriented messages], unless
limited to nonconsensual communications as the courts have done with
regard to the existing prohibition on such telephone calls, is most
likely unconstitutional."

How did this happen? Exon's bill seems to be part of a nationwide
trend creepingly criminalizes the Net. The Nebraska lawmaker has had
more than a year to hone his message, playing the political hand of
paranoia. Last year he introduced an identical bill, wrapped into a
telecommunications reform package; the Senate recessed before acting
on it. He will likely take the same tack this year, now that
telecommunications reform is being given top legislative priority in
both the House and the Senate.

Beyond being a full-scale attack on our cyber rights, the bill is
unworkable on its face. Every day brings an explosion of newly formed
newsgroups, bulletin board topics, and mailing lists. Such logarithmic
proliferation of message traffic makes "comprehensive screening" for
lewd or obscene messages "practically impossible," lawyers Bruce and
Pfohl say in their analysis.  Under this bill, you don't have to use
the word fuck to be held libel. Even flames that someone finds
indecent, annoying, abusive or harassing - again without specific
definition of what that entails - "could subject employers, services,
and carriers to liability," Bruce and Pfohl say.

There also is a dangerous subtext imbedded in the Exon bill: the
increasing willingness of government to step in and try to regulate
the Internet, a move that is unprecedented.

Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center
raised this issue during a debate with Exon on CNN: "It would be a
mistake to try to regulate Internet communications as we currently
regulate the telephone network," he said. "This is a very different
type of communications environment, and I think the proposal will
raise a whole host of problems."  Exon tried to brush the comments
aside, saying Rotenberg was "overrracting." Critics of the bill, Exon
claimed, misinterpreted the bill's intent, "but it's part of the
hoopla that goes on any time anyone tries to take any action to clean
up portions of our society that myself and others believe are bringing
great injury."

Hoopla? You're damn right, Senator, but you haven't seen anything yet.
As this article goes to press, there's still time to drive a stake
through the heart of this bill. If, as expected, it gets added as an
amendment to the telecom reform bill, enough pressure can be brought
to bear so that its cancerous provisions get surgically removed. The
problem: finding a Senator with the stones to stand against a
"morality bill," as S 314 is being pitched.  Act now. And remember
this: accept no compromise. Why? Compromise got us the "Easy Access
Wiretap Bill," courtesy of the FBI and a slick collaboration with the
Electronic Frontier Foundation. Compromise only serves to validate the
creeping trend toward government regulation of the Internet.

What can you do? Here's a three-part guerrilla strategy that has
proven effective in the past. First, steal this article. That's
right. Download it from HotWired's Internet site and electronically
plaster it where appropriate, keeping an eye out for others that may
have beat you to it.

Second, make your voice known in Washington by calling, faxing or
writing a letter to the members of the United States Senate,
particularly the Senators from your home state and the members of the
Commerce Committee. The Commerce Committee unanimously approved a
modified version of the act on March 23, 1995. Tell them you oppose
the bill, even in its modified form. They do listen! We've made it
easy for you to register your complaint via email with the members of
the Senate, using our  exon.letter.html   form letter. You
can find updates on the legislation, sample text for writing letters,
and the names of congressmen to write at the
gopher://gopher.panix.com/11/vtw/exon   Voters Telecommunications
Watch gopher site.  Get on the vtw-announce@vtw.org mailing list
and find out what others are doing to rally the cause.

To subscribe to the mailing list, send a message to
mailto:listproc@vtw.org   On the first line
of the message (no subject needed) write subscribe vtw-announce
[Firstname Lastname].

And remember the rallying cry. Put it in your .SIG file. Cyber Rights
Now: Accept No Compromise.

Brock N. Meeks is Washington, DC, bureau chief for Interactive
Week.  He's also the editor and publisher of CyberWire
Dispatch, a free, Internet-based news service.

 Larry Sites <LGSites@connectnet.com> JC's Fireman: Luke 12:49
 Freq FORGERY.ZIP, Falisfy Fundi father fakery
