
The ACLU is taking the right position here, IMHO. But I sense no consensus from the coalition of groups in the CDA challenge. -Declan Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 5-Apr-96 PICS required by law by "E. ALLEN SMITH"@ocelot.
What was I saying a while back about mandatory PICS through
liability?
As I recall, various people such as TCMay were saying that it wouldn't
happen.
Looks like I need to get out that article against PICS that I was working on and rewrite it a bit. I would remind people that PICS allows parents (or whoever else is holding the reins, such as an ISP - or the Chinese
firewall) t
o filter on such content as material (including scientific studies) stating that
a given illegal drug is not as harmful as some would claim, any idea futures market - even a simulated one, on homosexual content separately from heterosexual, and against criticisms of religions (such as Scientology). To their credit, the ACLU (in the CDA court case) has stated that they will not put a PICS rating on their web site, even if it contains "indecent" or allegedly "harmful to minors" material. I agree strongly with their position.