Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Tue, 20 Jun 1995 12:32:16 +0200 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Mon, 19 Jun 1995 22:33:21 -0500 Murph Sewall
<[log in to unmask]> said:
>>Let me put it this way. If this act passes, the Internet as we know it,
>>and AOL, CompuServe and others, are dead.
>
>Probably not. In the first place, even the current conservative Supreme
>Court is likely to rule it unConstitutional.
I meant if it passes all the legal barriers on its way, whose detail I'm
afraid I'm not familiar with :-)
>Aside from a few U.S. Senators who've clearly spent too much time
>confined inside the Beltway,
Actually, US senators tend to live in VA :-)
>Think of the money to be made setting up hosts in the Cayman Islands
>(hmmm... could I make as much a Mr. Bill? ;-)
Unfortunately, the way I read the legalese that was posted I'm not sure
it would work. If I run a mailing list in Sweden with US citizens
subscribed to it, I am unlikely to be arrested, although I wouldn't be
too surprised if a few FBI agents from the local US Branch Office paid me
a visit and tried to intimidate me. However this wouldn't really help Joe
US citizen if he posted "obscene" material from the US to my list. This
being said, if I ran a service like playboy.com, yes I would probably
relocate my web server outside US jurisdiction. But there the situation
is different because the material is provided by the webmaster, and not
by a third party.
Eric
|
|
|