Philip Galanter writes: > In the US the intent of the law is not primarily to moralistically > censor content, but rather to protect the children who would be > victimized by the production of child pornography. This is confirmed
Wouldn't then a wider audience expand the possibilities of someone noticing the business and telling the sheriff? And here we have a hilarious piece of background for this finnish mess: when representative of finnish police was asked "how come The Google was not among those cencored pages as it contains the same links as now-cencored list of Matti Nikki" the answer from Lars Henriksson was "it is not a website, it is a browser" (original audio here for those who understand finnish is at http://autorata.com/files/seonselain.mp3 :-) -- Antti # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
