Re: Effects of S.314 (Communications Decency Act)

[slowdog <slowdog@wookie.net>]

On Tue, 7 Feb 1995 jpp@markv.com wrote:

> Uh oh!  Egg on my face.  Will someone explain to me how the amendments
> in S.314 make owners of ISPs or other computer systems liable for
> 'bad' data?  I apologize for my previous uncalled for (so it seams to
> me now) ranting.

Sure, read on:

>    (a) Prohibited acts generally
>    
>    Whoever -
>    
>    (1) in the District of Columbia or in interstate or foreign
>    communication by means of [telephone] telecommunications
>    device -
>    
>    (A) [makes any comment, request, suggestion or proposal] 
>    makes, transmits, or otherwise makes available any comment,
>    request, suggestions, proposal, image, or other communication]
>    which is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent;

Here's an important bit. "Transmits or otherwise makes available" is 
different from the earlier law. It DOES pleace a burden of responsibility 
upon the provider of service. NOTE that unlike other portions of the law, 
boths old and new versions, this part DOES NOT include the word 
"knowingly". Crucial, crucial point.

>    (B) [makes a telephone call, whether or not conversation
>    ensues, without disclosing his identity and with intent to
>    annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person at the called
>    number] makes a telephone call or utilizes a telecommunications
>    device, whether or not conversation or communications ensues,
>    without disclosing his identity with intent to annoy, abuse,
>    threaten, or harass any person at the called number or who
>    receives the communication;

No anonymous annoying! Does this mean we can't raid IRC channels anymore? 
Or flame people from anon.petit.fi (sp?) accounts?



- dog