Comments | wolfheart17: Outrage.

wolfheart17

Outrage.

Mar 21, 2006 10:48

I am not sure how many of you know about the case of Nitke v. Gonzales, on which the SCOTUS just confirmed a lower court ruling. Basically, what this ruling amounts to, is that under the Miller "community standards" test in obscenity cases, the federal government is able to apply standards from the most restrictive communities when dealing with ( Read more... )

Comments 4

novalis March 21 2006, 21:20:11 UTC

This makes me want to combine porn-get, bittorrent, del.icio.us, and tor to make an unstoppable, anonymous, fast porn propagation network.

What's neat is that you could use something based on the bittorrent tit-for-tat system to donate hashcash (in the form of rpow) to good uploaders, which could then be spent to vote on what should be sent out next, and to buy more download bandwidth. People would just leave the app on 24/7, and when they wanted to watch some porn, they would look through the local cache to see what was interesting and watch that. Then they could look through the pending queue and vote by sending hashcash to uploaders.

But all this requires more tor scalabiltiy.

klarfax March 22 2006, 01:42:23 UTC

Wow...I can't say I'm too surprised though given the addition of Alito and Roberts.

This is the first I've heard of it, but it sounds like complete and utter bullshit to me.

klarfax March 22 2006, 02:16:46 UTC

ok, well, actually it looks like this ruling doesn't change much--the SC didn't actually issue an opinion, and the lower court ruling is probably no wose than previous rulings on the subject. Still, the idea that federal obscenity prosecutors can pick anywhere in the country to prosecute internet porn is total bullshit. I think the problem is that judges have a very strange view of how the internet works--they seem to be assuming that a user downloading something from a server in another area is the same kind of action as someone sending something in the mail.

wolfheart17 March 22 2006, 07:50:47 UTC

No, this case does not make anything worse, and may even make some things better, as the court did take some shots at Miller and Thomas. However the evidentiary standard that they required was insane.