Subject: [Asrg] Re: Spam laws

From: Jim Witte <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 14:33:39 -0500

> It's a pity the US legislature has again, as it so often does, chosen a
> model that supports the providers of campaign funds instead of a model 
> that
> protects the ordinary Joe. Maybe we can get can-spam canned and siome
> sensible legislation in its place (adopting the EU directive might be 
> a good

   Getting probably off-topic into the "politics of spam" - what about 
all the porm spam out there?

   That should certainly fall under almost any indecency standard I can 
imagine - and it shouldn't be too hard to write some indecency law that 
would trap them, never even get *near* the "artistic soft-porn" side of 
things..  And probably get around first-ammendment problems too (what 
exactly is the Free Speech value of showing explicitly naked breasts, 
clitorii (Latin plural correct?) and  penises, in various 
configurations, pray tell me?)  An in the EU, one might not have the 
save "high bar" of protection as the First Ammendment in the US - I 
don't know how much EU laws on speech protect.

Jim Witte
[email-masked]
Indiana University CS

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

---

From: Joe Marshall <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 11:33:49 -0500

Jim Witte <[email-masked]> writes:

> clitorii (Latin plural correct?) 

These are fun to be pedantic about.

penis -> penes
clitoris -> clitorides