Would Congress have been affected by the CDA?

[Tim May <tcmay@got.net>]

At 10:29 AM -0700 9/16/98, Anonymous wrote:

>Had the Communications Decency Act withstood
>judicial review (which it did not), posting the
>Starr report to the Internet arguably would have
>subjected the posters to fines of $250,000 and 5
>years in prison.

You're missing an important point: when has government not found ways to
exempt itself from laws? Whether the laws are about Social Security,
overtime, quotas for hiring, or even libel and slander, Congress and the
other branches exempt themselves. How convenient.

I don't know for sure if buried in Section 17, Paragraph 42  of the CDA was
an exemption for Official Government Documents, but I expect lawyers
would've found ample ways to publish what they want to publish. Amongst
other things, there would be many problems in forcing official documents,
court reports, executive findings, etc., to be bowdlerized to meet the CDA
requirements.

And the burrowcrats just _love_ to have laws which apply to the sheeple,
and not to them.

So I wouldn't make too much of this "apparent violation" of the CDA.

Don't forget that throughout history bluenoses and puritans have gotten off
on holding up examples of thoughtcrime.

--Tim May

(This space left blank pending determ. of acceptability to the gov't.)
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
ComSec 3DES:   831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Licensed Ontologist         | black markets, collapse of governments.