Declan McCullagh wrote:
Jamie, as you know, we disagree on your approach to self-labeling.
For the purposes of argument, let us say that we can agree that some, extreme, sites are unsuitable for children. But the problems arise not on the extremes, but in the great grey center.
Where do you draw the line? Therein lies the rub.
-Declan
Thanks for asking this question. I think it is important. I would have the labeling system be something that suits the publisher of the web page. The web page publisher would decide if he or she wanted to label the site as adult. There wouldn't be a great gray center, in the sense that the author/owner of the web page would make the decision to label or not label. Why would anyone label? As you know, most porn sites already have labeling out the whazoo. (how is this spelled?) The problem is that the label takes so many different forms, browsers can't filter the current labels, and that is why we have so much interest in cybersiter and other AI programs. This would make their existing voluntary labeling systems actually work. The simpler the tagging system, and the less information it conveys, the less likely it could be used to create a much more grandiose content labeling system. This is a pragmatic proposal. I think it makes sense. Jamie <love@cptech.org>
On Fri, 25 Jul 1997, James Love wrote:
Tim, if you think that no web site are unambiguously inappropriate for children, then you are in a state of denial. However, while I don't expect to change your mind on that point, let me set the record straight on your note. I don't favor RSACi or other PICS systems. I think these are a mistake, and should be resisted. However, I do favor a far less ambitious and less informative system (less is more, as far as I am concerned), which involves a simple, single voluntary tag, selected by the web page publisher, at their discretion, of the nature of
<META NAME="Rating" CONTENT="adult">
I think this is quite different from RSACi or SafeSurf's system, for the reasons mentioned by my missive to Jonah.
Jamie <love@cptech.org>
Tim May wrote:
At 9:16 AM -0700 7/25/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 12:08:32 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love <love@cptech.org> To: Jonah Seiger <jseiger@cdt.org> Cc: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>, fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu, chris_barr@cnet.com Subject: Re: CDT, RSACi, and "public service" groups
Jonah, I think the problems with the RSACi rating system are
pretty
obvious, and I also think it should be obvious that *any* rating system that would aspire to rate all or even a significant number of web pages would be a bad thing. That said, it seems to me that there exist web pages that are unambiguously inappropriate for children. Has CDT rejected
"Unambiguously inappropriate for children"?
No such thing. I can think of many, many things which many consider inappropriate for children (what age?), but which others, including myself, consider perfectly appropriate. I see no particular need to recite examples here.
Even with "obscenity," whatever that is (I seem not to know it when I see it, which would make me a poor Supreme Court Justice), that there are obscenity prosecutions and trials would seem to indicate that such materials are not "unambigously obscene."
The "mandatory voluntary" PICS/RSACi ratings, with penalties (presumably) for "mislabeling," just are another form of content control.
If they are truly voluntary, then people are free to say that a nudist site is appropriate for children, or not to label at all...the null label is just another label.
(Nudist sites, in realspace as well as cyberspace, are a classic example of the difficulty of judging "appropriate for children." Some jurisdicitions are attempting to legislate against children being in nudist camps. They would even claim that children seeing adults and other children nude is "unambiguosly inappropriate." Others disagree. So, how would their web site be labeled?)
The notion that something is "unambiguously" inapproprate, obscene, heretical, treasonous, whatever, is a flawed concept.
--Tim May
There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- pseudonyms,
zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
-- _______________________________________________________ James Love | Center for Study of Responsive Law P.O. Box 19367 | Washington, DC 20036 | 202.387.8030 http://www.cptech.org | love@cptech.org
-- _______________________________________________________ James Love | Center for Study of Responsive Law P.O. Box 19367 | Washington, DC 20036 | 202.387.8030 http://www.cptech.org | love@cptech.org