On Thu, Aug 16, 2001 at 12:09:18AM +0300, Sampo Syreeni wrote:

Americans naturally know far better than I ever will), one does have some reason to believe the "speech" in 1A is mostly targeted at political speech, even if the meaning is implied.

That's a common argument with which many Americans would probably agree. Eric Freedman at Hofstra law school has written a nice piece refuting it. It may even be available online.

...

(The landmark Supreme Court cases on obscenity, like Miller, have to do with fairly gross obscenity. Not that I agree they were justified, but the "online decency" issue is a long way from what the Supremes have said may be banned.)

So how about the "prevailing community standard" part?

The prevailing community standards of online communities like xxx sites seem to be pretty liberal. :)

Agreed. But I do think self-labelling is a nice gesture, and may even afford one a direct means of targeting a site specifically for the kind of people

Perhaps, but nice gestures lead to slippery slopes, IMHO. -Declan