Not signed in (Sign In)
This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJohn Smith
    • CommentTimeDec 6th 2007 edited
     (189.1)
    http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9829759-38.html?tag=nefd.top

    House vote on illegal images sweeps in Wi-Fi, Web sites

    The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday overwhelmingly approved a bill saying that anyone offering an open Wi-Fi connection to the public must report illegal images including "obscene" cartoons and drawings--or face fines of up to $300,000.........

    .........The definition of which images qualify as illegal is expansive. It includes obvious child pornography, meaning photographs and videos of children being molested. But it also includes photographs of fully clothed minors in overly "lascivious" poses, and certain obscene visual depictions including a "drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting." (Yes, that covers the subset of anime called hentai).


    The bold is mine.

    Okay, child pornography, sure. So, riddle me this, if I'm searching for screengrabs from ''Lolita' for a film class research project at a Starbucks, is the Chief IT Barista going to have to turn me in?
  1.  (189.2)
    I'd like a definition of "overly 'lacivious' poses".

    Also, how does one go about deciding the age of a character in a fictional drawing is?
  2.  (189.3)
    I always wait to worry for when and if such clear bullshit passes Senate Judiciary.

    The sheer number of horrible bills that pass the House can be mind boggling some days....
    •  
      CommentAuthorJohn Smith
    • CommentTimeDec 6th 2007
     (189.4)
    I'm far, far from a Ron Paul nut but I like that he's one of the two to oppose it.
  3.  (189.5)
    Worth noting that if the proposed anti-porn legislation passes in the UK, your example of screen grabs would be illegal here too (especially for 'violent' images, i.e. BDSM, even if faked or consensual). There seems to be an awful lot of 'think-of-the-children' as an excuse to crack down on adult behaviour these days. I don't think it's coincidental that the governments doing so are heavily influenced by Xtian right-wingnuts.

    (More on the UK bill here.)
    • CommentAuthorRedwynd
    • CommentTimeDec 6th 2007 edited
     (189.6)
    Note to self: move to third-world country. Acquire a dedicated DSL. Laugh at former neighbors to south.

    Seriously, the part about this that frightens me is what else they will be looking for while ostensibly guarding against "obscene" images. 'Cause, as we all know, the Americans aren't real good at sticking to their own laws....

    And would an unencrypted home Wi-Fi count as "a connection open to the public"?
    •  
      CommentAuthorCOMTE
    • CommentTimeDec 6th 2007
     (189.7)
    Redwynd,

    If I read the summary of the legislation as outlined in the article correctly, it would appear the answer to your question is, "yes".

    Frankly, this piece of legislation is pure B.S., and like previous attempts, will most likely be tossed once the inevitable court cases wend their way up to the SCOTUS.

    My guess is that not only do most wi-fi providers NOT have the means or capability to monitor what specific images their customers may be up- or downloading, but furthermore, how the Hell can they be expected to single out a specific laptop from say 15 or 20 that may be in-use in their establishment at any given time? I mean, seriously, are they expected to get on the PA and ask, "Hello! Could the person downloading the pictures of the child porn please come up to the front counter?"

    Yeah, that's gonna work real well...
    • CommentAuthorPooka
    • CommentTimeDec 6th 2007
     (189.8)
    i'm fairly disturbed by most of the things that are being passed these days...
  4.  (189.9)
    The strategy seems to be that if they (the politicians behind this stuff) hurl enough stupid crap at the populace, some of it will stick and they will get the complete surveillance state that they want. This law is stupid, but lots of stupid laws like this keep coming up, and eventually they will pass. It's sad that we have to hope that SCOTUS is willing to overturn idiocies like this. . . .
  5.  (189.10)
    Honestly, wait to see what happens in the Senate before crossing your fingers on SCOTUS.

    The house is insane. Does not mean the Senate will do the right thing, but allot of insipid laws die in Senate Judiciary - not because they are actually on the side of angels but because they try not to pass laws that will be overturned.

    http://www.news.com/Senator-Illegal-images-must-be-reported/2100-1028_3-6142332.html Is cause to worry, but lots of right crushing bills Senators support publicly to court soccer moms die quietly in committee.
  6.  (189.11)
    I'm having a time out until I can learn some manners.
    this is obviously ridiculous. I'm sure it has something to do with the election coming up.

    Next summer were gonna hear some old white guy cry out "My opponent voted in favor of child porn"
    • CommentAuthormunin218
    • CommentTimeDec 6th 2007
     (189.12)
    this is obviously ridiculous. I'm sure it has something to do with the election coming up.

    Next summer were gonna hear some old white guy cry out "My opponent voted in favor of child porn"


    .....likely.

This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.