Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: DoJ Brief is Filed [and they insulted the Public and the
From: Dave Farber <farber () central cis upenn edu>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 18:28:18 -0500
From: telstar () wired com (--Todd Lappin--) Subject: UPDATE: DoJ Brief is Filed At long last, the U.S. Department of Justice has filed a brief in Philadelpia, in an effort to persuade Judge Buckwalter NOT to issue a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) that would block implementation and enforcement of the Communications Decency Act. As you'll see below, the DoJ, much like Cathleen Cleaver, seems all too eager to equate "indecency" with "pornography." Grrrrrr. Even worse, the DoJ brief apparently cites Marty Rimm's discredited study about the "pervasiveness" of online pornography as evidence of the urgent need to outlaw indecent material. (TIME Magazine used Rimm's study as the basis for it's sensationalistic "Cyberporn" cover story back in July. It was later revealed that Rimm was an undergradute at Carnegie Mellon University when he did the study, and that his research contained so many methodological flaws that it was all but worthless. TIME even printed a retraction of the story. For more information, visit http://www.hotwired.com/special/pornscare/) According to Ann Beeson, Staff Counsel for the ACLU, "We never thought DOJ would be dumb enough to cite to the Rimm study, so it wasn't mentioned in our initial brief! We expect the judge to rule on the TRO without further reply from us, so we'll have to wait until the next round (the preliminary injunction hearing) before getting in all the info debunking Rimm -- in any event, it is certain to be *very* embarassing for the government." Grrrrrrr. No word yet on when we can expect a decision from Judge Buckwalter, but the ACLU tells me they plan to issue a press release later today. If so, I'll immediately pass it along. In the meantime, here's a CNN update on the DoJ action from http://www.cnnfn.com/news/wires/9602/15/telecom.lawsuit/index.html Stay tuned! --Todd Lappin-- Section Editor WIRED Magazine ================================================================== Justice Department responds to telecom lawsuit February 15, 1996 Web posted at: 12:30 p.m. EST PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania (AP) -- The Justice Department filed its written response Wednesday to a lawsuit seeking to block the new computer "indecency" law, saying criminal prosecutions are needed to stop a huge increase in the availability of pornography. The government urged a federal judge not to issue a temporary restraining order against provisions that would make it a crime to send "indecent" and sexually explicit material to minors over computer networks. "Individuals undoubtedly have an important interest in being free of purposeful and direct intrusions on First Amendment freedoms," the brief said. "But the governmental interests at stake here in controlling access by minors in indecent sexually explicit materials is compelling." The American Civil Liberties Union and 19 other groups sought the temporary ban Feb. 8, the same day President Clinton signed into law the Telecommunications Act of 1996. U.S. District Judge Ronald L. Buckwalter said then that he wanted to see a written response from prosecutors before issuing a ruling. The law defines indecent as that which, "in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards, sexual or excretory activities or organs." Opponents say the standard is too broad and would criminalize information, even in private e-mail, that has educational, artistic and social value, simply because it relates to sex. The government said the indecency standard has been upheld as constitutional in previous cases, and argued that the law's purpose is to restrict access to widely available pornographic images and materials. Violators would face up to two years in prison and $250,000 in fines. A temporary restraining order should only be granted in extraordinary circumstances and if there are no other legal remedies available to plaintiffs. Meanwhile, the situation is dire, the government said. "In the end, plaintiffs cannot dispute that a large and growing amount of pornography is presently available on-line and easily accessible to children in the home, far exceeding anything available prior to the advent of on-line computer services," the government said. ###
Current thread:
- IP: DoJ Brief is Filed [and they insulted the Public and the Dave Farber (Feb 15)