>----- Forwarded message ([log in to unmask] (Tom Evans)) -----<
>FORWARD from alt.wired
>(This was written by my good friend Matt Franco.)
>Dear informed reader,
>I would like to write a short explanation and warning concerning the
>and future implications of the Exon/Coats/Gorton Communications Decency
>you may know, this bill is a limitation on materials written and
>through the internet. Also, strict fines are included for not "monitering"
>"restricting" the acessability to such materials (language and content).
>a final rider reguarding limiting cable content to minors through an
>controlled by parents. This bill has tremendious support in Congress and
>pass. Basically the biggest infringment on the first amendment rights of
>citizens of the United States EVER enacted in the history of our country.
>Now, the question is asked: "What does this mean in a nut shell?" Well, I
>a some what believable theory reguarding all this. First of all, this bill
>supposedly constructed by the Christian Coalition in order to protect the
>"innocent children from the evils of the harsh world." This is sort of
>The "excuse" of protecting the children from "inapropraite" material,
>pornography, and other such stuff is a cover. This was basically a
>for, aided by, and lobbied through by big businesses and corporations.
>this out, when this bill was first introduced corporations screamed that
>horrible because of the massive fines that would be layed upon them
>it. Then, a few months and many slight changes and agreements later, big
>businesses and corporations adopted it. Think about it, what does this
>mean for them? Certainly not fines. Definatly not prossecution, they are
>protected. It means an end to their small competitors. Really, these small
>companies could not put up with the enourmous fine and litigations that
>take place. They would dissapear. But, there is more.
>If the internet must be cleansed of all foul material and the corporations
>not directly take responsibility for doing so, how will it get done?
>internet police. Think about it, the companies have so much to gain. They
>get the internet "policed" for obscene materials and have another
>an inforcement against hackers. Really, that is what the government and
>corporations have wanted for years. And, this bill uses the excuse of
>protecting the "poor, innocent, defenseless children" as a way to do it.
>at it logically, the government has used the excuse of protecting children
>way to regulate and stop hackers by putting things in simple terms for the
>unenlightened public can understand. It's simple, bad material... bad
>put on bad material... we must stop the bad people. Done, that simple.
>Never forget, Rome did fall; World War II did occur. Shit happens, so
>and smell the coffee, and don't let the government screw you up the
>--- Internet Message Header Follows ---
>Xref: cunews alt.activism:102191 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:246107
>alt.politics.usa.misc:40085 alt.privacy:25911 alt.wired:20699
>From: Brad Neuberg <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: **Their screwing you up the asshole**
>Date: 18 Jun 1995 08:45:27 GMT
>Organization: Valley Tech Corporation
>Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
>forwarded from: Tom Evans
[log in to unmask]