I think that there is still a substantial possibility that many kinds of expression will be marginalized and hard to access for a great many users. One of my co-workers has pointed out that the need for something as simple as a helper application for Netscape loses about 90% of his audience. By simply making it rather more difficult for people to chat about some things, governments can effectively push such things out of the way of all but the most determined readers. This is actually one of those odd Laffer-curve-like phenomena, where as long as the expression isn't too inherently desirable, government restrictions can be somewhat effective, but the more tightly they try to control things, the more likely the are to lose, as there will be more and more desirable content outside the sanctioned sphere of activity. Consequently, I was much happier to see the "indecency" standard get passed instead of the "harmful" standard, as the former will push far more content into the "gray" area of the net, which will encourage development and adoption of appropriate tools. A quote from Star Wars (which I'm just now incorporating into my .sig) was just echoed back to me in a letter from a chap I spoke with from the Australian Office of Strategic Crime Assessment, as encapsulating what he got out of a rather long chat we had when he was passing through the Bay Area last month. Here it is: ------ , ------ Douglas Barnes "The tighter you close your fist, Governor Tarkin, cman@communities.com the more systems will slip through your fingers." cman@best.com --Princess Leia