Forum - View topicNEWS: FL Court: Online Content Held to Distant Community Standards
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
ktqck
Posts: 3 |
|
|||
|
I think this ruling will be overturned. I can't see the ACLU or other free-speech advocacy groups, let alone businesses like Amazon who sell what could be considered obscene in certain parts of the country, letting this go as it's not about the specific content (live porn involving bodily fluids) but rather who determines what is obscene and the unfair burden to businesses by making producers responsible for what their customers do with it and where their customers live. It's unrealistic by any stretch of the imagination.
Basically this case is trying to establish that all Amercians must abide by the community standards of the strictest American local obscenity laws which in turn takes the rights away from those communities who have determined more lenient obscenity laws. Up to now the Supreme Court has let local laws determine obscenity standards based on local community standards (hence NYC is far more lenient then say Bowling Green, KY) but if the "Community" becomes national, if not global, then the Supreme Court would actually have to determine the criteria and definition of "obscene". A court in Tampa, FL would not, should not, determine that for the country. The resident could be held accountable (although I have other opinions on that as well) but not the creator if in fact the area he created it in would not consider it obscene. The fact that a computer chip made outside the area would influence the ruling it would not be upheld unless it could be proven he could have gotten a local pc made of only local parts. Again, an unrealistic burden. Although, to be fair, folks have been convicted on less... If this were allowed to be upheld it sets a bad precedence. For example - a state which outlaws any homosexual activity could determine that none of us could have ever watched Will & Grace and cannot buy the dvds. (I know not anime - but I think it makes the point better). And believe me, while those laws may not be enforced as such - they are still technically on the books and some aggressive hack lawyer can make a name for himself over it. Technically in my state there's a local law in one city (not mine) on the books that says women must wear at least 16 yards of fabric in public at all times. Uh - yeah - I'm in the south, not going to happen. It's too dang hot. And will they hold Hot Topic responsible for me buying a sleeveless t-shirt and shorts? This reminds me of the ridiculous new Australian laws. I wonder if Harry Potter will become illegal to view or read in that country. Let's face it the boy is tortured throughout the series and that now is their definition of obscene - any portrayal of a child being "abused or tortured". This is a case of the law not keeping up with technology and creating undue burdens on businesses because lawmakers don't know what they are doing and too many conservative nutjobs think freedom of speech only applies to speech they agree with. And anime comes in a lot of different flavors - many are bound to offend someone, somewhere in the country. Of course as a country I've always be amused by how we are ok with any kind of slasher gore, goreporn, etc...but have a woman flash a bare breast or a man do a full frontal, let alone actually show anything sexual, and we giggle then collectively faint. Basically they'd like us to become China without Google.... Ok - off the soapbox now... |
||||
|
||||
Proman
 Posts: 947 Location: USA |
|
|||
|
This is supremely idiotic. I wonder how they will react if they'll start being sued by the Arab world and what they find to be obscene.
|
||||
|
||||
hikaru004
 Posts: 2306 |
|
|||
He lost his appeal. The original case was over in 2008. If the ACLU or Amazon or anyone else was going to come to his defense, they would have done so by now. The guy's going back to finish his jail time imo. The US gov't cherry-picked which locality was going to get the trial. That's the problem when you're on the internet. Any conservative region can take offense and now can do something about it. Last edited by hikaru004 on Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:16 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||
|
||||
egoist
 Posts: 7762 |
|
|||
Aren't they building nuclear weapons for that? I wonder when will those "obscenity laws" apply to mothers dressing their daughters(age 6-15) like a 20-year-old |
||||
|
||||
|
configspace
Posts: 3717 |
|
|||
Exactly. This will encourage ideological hard-right DAs to go after people outside their community. I bet they all have their sights set on California now. |
||||
|
||||
The Xenos
 Posts: 1519 Location: Boston |
|
|||
This idea is so infeasible I want to laugh out loud. It's like one local court trying to police the world based on their personal standards. Sadly, seems like these jerks actually got someone with it. Oh wait... looking at one of the original articles.. We're talking about that Max Hardcore guy? Meh. I've read up on him. The guy's a scumbag and as much as I usually stand up for free speech and even pornography, the guy deserves to be in jail. Though I'd rather see him in there for abuse or something like that than on some trumped up obscenity charge. While I'm glad the scumbag is serving time, I don't like the ruling they got him on one bit. |
||||
|
||||
|
hikaru004
Posts: 2306 |
|
|||
Yeah, when you start digging into the background, he doesn't smell like a rose so to speak. :sd: |
||||
|
||||
eyeresist
 Posts: 995 Location: a 320x240 resolution igloo (Sydney) |
|
|||
Don't be ridiculous. They're not banning Harry Potter. They're restricting access to sites depicting actual child abuse. That's different. |
||||
|
||||
Mohawk52
 Posts: 8202 Location: England, UK |
|
|||
|
Well I guess this answers the question of Mr. Handley getting away with it if he had just down loaded those mangas that get him sent down. Looks like he would have been done either way.
|
||||
|
||||
Daemonblue
 Posts: 701 |
|
|||
Yea, just like they're only banning porn with real children and not people with small.... oh wait. The law is a blunt instrument, you can't say "oh well we meant it only for this and not that" as it sees all things equally. They can and will find a way to ban something using some obscure draconian law if it benefits their interest, just look at how Al Capone got locked up, not for his crimes but for tax evasion. Now let me ask you this, are you absolutely sure every tax form you've filled out has been absolutely correct without question? |
||||
|
||||
|
configspace
Posts: 3717 |
|
|||
Er no, except the new ruling in Australia bans everything else that's NOT real child abuse (which was of course already illegal before), very similar to what is going on with criminal obscenity laws here; in addition to mandating that ISPs filter content. Basically whatever the judges deem "indecent", like cartoon porn, any porn featuring female ejaculation, any porn featuring small breasted females no matter age, etc. and all this despite a large body of formal written opposition I've heard. But hey, as long as no one's marching in the streets and burning down buildings, the legislators think the public is behind them, so don't forget pretty soon ur gonna go to jail for ur fetishes down under! |
||||
|
||||
|
The Xenos
Posts: 1519 Location: Boston |
|
|||
Hell, it's not even the urination and deification. That stuff does nothing for me. I'm not too grossed out by it, but I just don't get how anyone gets turned on by it. Yet if people want to consensually do that crazy stuff and film it and sell it to others, who are we to stop them? Hell, even spanking and S&M I think we should allow as long as it's consensual and safe. The trouble to me, and something this case doesn't seem to go after, is that he supposedly pushed some of those girls too far and was outright abusive beyond their consent. Meanwhile, s much as I can't stand the bastard, his lawyers are correct about the internet. They "maintained that standard was unworkable when dealing with the Internet." It's true. You can't have one local community arresting anyone who posts something online. I want to say German or Austrialia tried proposing something similar with violence in games online or something. I know a couple Republicans, maybe even Mr Tubes himself former Senator Ted Stephens, had wanted to impose an FCC type of regulatory group for regulating and grading the internet. It's simply not possible. The way the internet works is with exponentially more content and producers of content than even cable television. There is no feasible way to enforce it. Florida thinks it can police the internet. That's just not sensible. |
||||
|
||||
tyciol
 Posts: 134 Location: Canada |
|
|||
|
This does not bode well. It`s a good example of why this obscenity crock should just be shut down completely. Eventually there is a tiny community in the US somewhere offended by everything, even something mainstream.
I think they should be rounded up and protest everything en masse to illustrate this abuse of law. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group