FC: Annoy.com's Clinton Fein on Mary Landrieu's ".p0rn" bill

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Sun Apr 21 2002 - 06:22:15 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: Ben Edelman: 4,525 different domains lead to one porn site"

    Previous Politech message:
    http://www.politechbot.com/p-03415.html
    
    ---
    
    Subject: RE: Sen. Mary Landrieu wants to force ICANN to create ".p0rn"
    Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 13:32:51 -0700
    From: "Clinton D. Fein" <clinton.feinat_private>
    To: <declanat_private>
    
    Hi Declan:
    
    Not sure whether this will amuse or depress you. It is a rather graphic
    assessment of the Landrieu legislation.
    
    I have attached a somewhat savory excerpt.
    
    Harmful to Minors
    .politicians
    
    by Clinton Fein
    http://annoy.com/editorials/doc.html?DocumentID=100332
    
    [Exerpt]
    Reading the language of a new bill carefully, some things remain
    predictably the same. Politicians with no clue about technology and a
    penchant for publicity at the expense of children, will keep American
    children about as safe as hiring Osama bin Laden as a babysitter or
    confiscating toenail clippers from grandmothers in Oklahoma.
    
    Does Landrieu's legislation mean news organization web sites that
    streamed a video file of, say, Yasser Arafat's wife suggesting the
    sacrifice of children in the guise of suicide bombers would turn the
    children into martyrs (and inspiring thoughts that might be considered
    harmful to minors -- in some communities) will now have to register as a
    .prn site? Or are "legitimate" media organizations exempt, so our kids
    can happily access "Temptation Island" online (or Page Three of The Sun)
    or if blocked, simply satellite surf between Al Jazeera and freeway
    shootings live on MSNBC?
    
    Or are minors only harmed by images of what their parents might have
    done to 'create' them with to begin with, not what they might be
    suggesting to 'destroy' them?
    
    And further, if this brilliantly crafted legislation only applies to a
    'commercial' online service, would subscription-based sites that
    included such items as this very legislation (which would be harmful to
    not only minors, but pretty much everyone else) be forced to register as
    .prn sites?
    
    Of course, Landrieu forgets to address who decides what is harmful to
    minors. Could a vegan parent decide that a commercial site like
    McDonald's that encourages the unhealthy eating of genetically
    engineered meat is harmful to their children in their world view? Or
    will Representative Bob Barr take time between marriages and the
    disbursing of money to battered women (and their kids who are too
    bruised to even use a mouse if they could afford the electricity) that
    are being encouraged to stay married for a few extra government bucks,
    to decide what's harmful to minors or not?
    
    What about sites selling condoms? Harmful to minors if their lives are
    nothing more than a mistaken result of their parents having missed the
    site to begin with. Harmful if they're HIV positive because some idiot
    decided that safe sex information is harmful to minors (who happen to be
    the child's parents), and were blocked from access to .prn sites
    offering safe sex information. According to Landrieu's own web site,
    more than 20 percent of teen-age girls in Louisiana give birth before
    their 18th birthday. Is she aiming for 30 percent?
    
    Luckily very wealthy, albeit non-commercial, organizations like the
    Boston Archdiocese need not worry about what they promote online since
    they would be exempt. A child alone in a confessional with a pedophile
    in a habit with a habit, shielded and protected at great expense, cannot
    be as harmful to kids as seeing what goes on in the Oval Office when
    Presidents are bored with government shutdowns.
    
    And all of this because Ms. Landrieu arrogantly and neurotically
    fantasizes that someone sitting across the table from her at dinner has
    a mini-cam attached to their shoe! Clearly, she's never dined with
    Richard Reid, or she would be focusing on more important issues.
    [/Exerpt]
    
    Clinton
    _____________________________________
    
    Clinton Fein
    Editor & Publisher
    Annoy.com
    370 7th Street, Suite 6
    San Francisco, CA  94103
    Phone: 415-552-7655
    Fax: 415-552-7656
    http://apollomedia.com/
    _____________________________________
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sign this pro-therapeutic cloning petition: http://www.franklinsociety.org
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Apr 21 2002 - 06:29:06 PDT