Oh No! Nazis on the Nets

[Mike Godwin]

Greg writes:

> "Perry E. Metzger" <uunet!lehman.com!pmetzger> writes:
> 
> > I'll remind you that the supreme court has held that text-only works
> > can not be held to be obscene. You can write anything you want,
> > including explicit descriptions of sodomizing dead children, and it
> > can not be censored.
> 
> As I mentioned to Perry in E-mail, the above is incorrect. Pure text
> can be obscene and hence unprotected by the First Amendment.  Kaplan v.
> California, 413 U.S. 115, 118-119, 93 S.Ct. 2680, 2683-2684 (1973).
> Others here (Mike Godwin?) can likely provide a much better discussion
> of just where this fits into First Amendment law; Shepherds' reveals no
> more recent decisions which modify the holding in Kaplan.
 
Greg is right. (Sorry, Perry.) As a practical matter, there are almost
no obscenity prosecutions for words these days, but technically it's
possible that words can be obscene. Ask 2 Live Crew.


--Mike