"William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@amaranth.com> writes:
In <Pine.GSO.3.95.970608053415.20770A-100000@well.com>, on 06/08/97 at 07:36 AM, Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> said:
I don't think commercial speech should be treated as second-class speech. But my position is hardly surprising.
Well I think that there are some that would confuse the issue between 1st Amendment free speech and the issues surrounding fraud. Especially those in government who write the laws that regulate commercial speech.
Sure - it's their means of livelyhood :-) Now, "fraud" suggests that the onus is on the gumbint to prove that the claim is false. However if I were to market "borshch" by mail order as a cure for cancer, I'd be asked to "prove" in some ridiculous unscientific ways that it does indeed cure cancer - spending $100M, which only the few large drug companies can affort - suits them and the FDA just fine. Troll: and how about them proposed restrictions on tobacco advertising... --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps