[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Responses to "Spam costs and questions" (long)




Declan McCullagh wrote:
> 
> 
> Such a law would be unconstitutional, I believe, and unjust. It's
> compelled speech: the government forcing you to say something.
> Depending on how it's worded, it could also impact core political
> speech, something the courts generally don't like.
> 

Declan,

There is a lot of commercial compelled speech. For example,
mutual funds must say that past performance is not a guarantee
of future results.

Do you find this kind of compelled speech unconstitutional?

igor

> 
> 
> On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> > 
> > Is there any justification for a law that would require senders to make
> > filtering easier, e.g., by attaching a [COMMERCIAL] tag to all UCEs.
> > 
> > 	- Igor.
> > 
> > 
> 



	- Igor.