Ernest Miller pursues research and writing on cyberlaw, intellectual property, and First Amendment issues. Mr. Miller attended the U.S. Naval Academy before attending Yale Law School, where he was president and co-founder of the Law and Technology Society, and founded the technology law and policy news site LawMeme. He is a fellow of the Information Society Project at Yale Law School.
Ernest Miller's blog postings can also be found @ Copyfight LawMeme
Feel free to contact me about articles, websites and etc. you think I may find of interest. I'm also available for consulting work and speaking engagements. Email: ernest.miller 8T gmail.com
I've been meaning to write about this indepth for some time, but haven't gotten around to it yet. The government is promulgating new regulations for record-keeping for pornographers under (18 USC 2257), a law I've said is a Little-Known Anti-Pornography Statute [that] Threatens Free Speech. WIRED has a decent introduction to the issue (Blue Law Makes Webmasters See Red). This may seem unimportant, but it is basically a flanking attack on free speech. The government can't go after the speech directly, so they create bogus regulatory requirements to shut it down.
news on this front, the FSC (Free Speech Coalition) has filed a complaint and a motion seeking temporary injunctive relief regarding the new regulations. full article here :
http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Web_Exclusive_News&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=230236
also, avnonline.com provided a good editorial history lesson of why the regulations were enacted in the first place, and why they are destined not to work. full article here :
http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Web_Exclusive_News&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=230028
personally, i think the new regulations are an attempt to shut down adult websites "al capone" style. that is, if we can't actually get a conviction for obscenity, then we'll make some regulations that are so difficult to comply with that (a) the individuals will discontinue offering the material or (b) we can easily find any site we want not in compliance and send 'em to jail.
the original regulations were actually a benefit to the producers of adult content. they were a proof that said basically, "look i have valid id's for all of the performers in this production". that way if there was any question about a performer's age, there was solid proof on file that the producer had obtained a valid id.
there's been alot of coverage on this topic on both http://www.avnonline.com/ and http://www.xbiz.com/ (any many other places i'm sure)
Ernest Miller pursues research and writing on cyberlaw, intellectual property, and First Amendment issues. Mr. Miller attended the U.S. Naval Academy before attending Yale Law School, where he was president and co-founder of the Law and Technology Society, and founded the technology law and policy news site LawMeme. He is a fellow of the Information Society Project at Yale Law School.
Ernest Miller's blog postings can also be found @
1. matt on June 17, 2005 10:32 AM writes...
news on this front, the FSC (Free Speech Coalition) has filed a complaint and a motion seeking temporary injunctive relief regarding the new regulations. full article here :
http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Web_Exclusive_News&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=230236
also, avnonline.com provided a good editorial history lesson of why the regulations were enacted in the first place, and why they are destined not to work. full article here :
http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Web_Exclusive_News&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=230028
personally, i think the new regulations are an attempt to shut down adult websites "al capone" style. that is, if we can't actually get a conviction for obscenity, then we'll make some regulations that are so difficult to comply with that (a) the individuals will discontinue offering the material or (b) we can easily find any site we want not in compliance and send 'em to jail.
the original regulations were actually a benefit to the producers of adult content. they were a proof that said basically, "look i have valid id's for all of the performers in this production". that way if there was any question about a performer's age, there was solid proof on file that the producer had obtained a valid id.
there's been alot of coverage on this topic on both http://www.avnonline.com/ and http://www.xbiz.com/ (any many other places i'm sure)
Permalink to Comment