Er, I am not sure what you are arguing against, but I don't think it is my proposal....
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 11:28:08PM -0500, Brandon wrote: > Categorizing content is not the same as filtering. Historically search > engines have only gotten in trouble if they 1) filtered content or 2) had > a special category for specifically illicit content. For instance, some > search engines have been hassled for allowing users to search specifically > for MP3s. However, search engines have generally not be hassled for not > blocking searches with for the keyword "MP3". > > So while you can have a directory view that splits keys into directories > and you end up with all the keys starting with "illicit/" in the > "illicit" folder, you're probably okay. However, if you have an option for > "Search For Illicit Material" then that's probably a bad plan. > > Anyway, I'm not trying to make a moral arguement about censorship and > such. You're totally free to do whatever you want with your site. It's > yours, so have at it. I'm just trying to give some advice based on my view > of U.S. legal precedent regarding search engines and illicit content so > that nobody gets unduly hassled. But take it or leave it because I'm not a > lawyer. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20010417/cbca97ec/attachment.pgp>
