NODE 5536123fRe: new "obscenity" law on the net
pp@pfawww.pp.se (Per Persson)Thu, 22 Feb 1996 23:47:27 +0800
[Ben sent this to rms at 'Sat, 3 Feb 1996 10:32:00 -0700'];
"Ben A. Mesander" <ben@gnu.ai.mit.edu> writes:
>Just curious - will the new law outlawing obscenity on the net in the us
>cause you to make changes to some of the comments in the emacs source code?
Some weeks ago, Lars and Richard went through the Gnus source and
removed 'fuck' two times and 'fucking' one time (if I didn't get it
all wrong). I wonder if that's your fault.
/pp.
--
anum meum aperies, asperge me spermate tuo et inquinabor
url; http://pfawww.pp.se/~pp/ email; <pp@pfawww.pp.se>
phone#'s; work/home/fax: +46 (0)18 100899/247473/103737
NODE a61d293eRe: new "obscenity" law on the net
"Corey Minter" <cminter@mipos2.intel.com>Thu, 29 Feb 1996 06:59:22 +0800
> "Ben A. Mesander" <ben@gnu.ai.mit.edu> writes:
>
> >Just curious - will the new law outlawing obscenity on the net in the us
> >cause you to make changes to some of the comments in the emacs source code?
>
> Some weeks ago, Lars and Richard went through the Gnus source and
> removed 'fuck' two times and 'fucking' one time (if I didn't get it
> all wrong). I wonder if that's your fault.
what if I had written some code which doesn't function properly unless
certain indecent words were in the source code and then put the code
on the WWW :). Would that violate Congress' Despotic Action?
What if when you looked at the text on a 80 column screen and because
of line wrap it said something indecent otherwise it was
unintelligible? It seems that no reasonable person would go after a
person for that but then aren't we talking about selective
enforcement.
F T C U H D C E A K