NODE cc6f0bc4Re: Oh No! Nazis on the Nets
greg@ideath.goldenbear.com (Greg Broiles)Fri, 11 Feb 94 20:10:40 PST
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
"Perry E. Metzger" <uunet!lehman.com!pmetzger> writes:
> I'll remind you that the supreme court has held that text-only works
> can not be held to be obscene. You can write anything you want,
> including explicit descriptions of sodomizing dead children, and it
> can not be censored.
As I mentioned to Perry in E-mail, the above is incorrect. Pure text
can be obscene and hence unprotected by the First Amendment. Kaplan v.
California, 413 U.S. 115, 118-119, 93 S.Ct. 2680, 2683-2684 (1973).
Others here (Mike Godwin?) can likely provide a much better discussion
of just where this fits into First Amendment law; Shepherds' reveals no
more recent decisions which modify the holding in Kaplan.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.4
iQCVAgUBLVxTKX3YhjZY3fMNAQEd2wP7BmUq0bUzhdhSg9+/Y/+by1C+p0dEu2ef
Q8c0nlzkux6cUBQPrr18/c+dAmMQ4x+Dofr/0N1jF+q9uffnVmeVa9qQjzB1SzJy
9PCsXI7x/7B1bNZFuegliJvUn7aD7UqBBS9Au7/nlZ6Ky8Gb6G0HadrIaZyP9yQy
PuQh+QDXTnY=
=F0SC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Greg Broiles ".. has bizarre Cyberanarchist theories relating
greg@goldenbear.com to human punishment." -- L. Detweiler
NODE b76412fdRe: Oh No! Nazis on the Nets
Mike Godwin <mnemonic@eff.org>Sat, 12 Feb 94 23:54:45 PST
Greg writes:
> "Perry E. Metzger" <uunet!lehman.com!pmetzger> writes:
>
> > I'll remind you that the supreme court has held that text-only works
> > can not be held to be obscene. You can write anything you want,
> > including explicit descriptions of sodomizing dead children, and it
> > can not be censored.
>
> As I mentioned to Perry in E-mail, the above is incorrect. Pure text
> can be obscene and hence unprotected by the First Amendment. Kaplan v.
> California, 413 U.S. 115, 118-119, 93 S.Ct. 2680, 2683-2684 (1973).
> Others here (Mike Godwin?) can likely provide a much better discussion
> of just where this fits into First Amendment law; Shepherds' reveals no
> more recent decisions which modify the holding in Kaplan.
Greg is right. (Sorry, Perry.) As a practical matter, there are almost
no obscenity prosecutions for words these days, but technically it's
possible that words can be obscene. Ask 2 Live Crew.
--Mike