|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
Re: [PLUG] VoiceNet Rumors?
|
I always have a problem with this.
Nuance matters here. Pictures posted by, say, American naturalists or
African !Kung tribesmen will show naked people including children doing
nothing more than normal things and smiling for the camara without their
clothes on. Pervs are simply pervs and will salivate over those same
pictures.
Without a human to judge every correspondence, who has some sense of
perspective (rare), how do you guarantee proper protections?
Remember also the gentleman from the Who, who was according to his
statement, looking (morbidly) for images of himself being abused as
a child.
bs
On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, Jon Nelson wrote:
>
> gabriel rosenkoetter said:
> > On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 07:41:43AM -0500, Jon Nelson wrote:
>
> >> Their claim was basically, "...it wasn't their responsibility to
> >> enforce
> >> public decency laws, nor are they responsible for the content." A
> >> search
> >> warrant was served and their servers taken. I don't know the eventual
> >> outcome though.
> >
> > It'd be interesting to know.
>
> This case is pretty old (Oct. 28, 1998) and I couldn't find many details
> on the outcome but here is what I found.
>
> This is a post and a response about this case. The response is from the
> lead investigator:
>
> http://www.politechbot.com/p-00039.html
>
> This is the only article I could find that included a disposition:
>
> http://www.webmastervault.com/news-aiu-0302.shtml
>
> An excerpt from the above page:
>
> "BuffNet was charged with a misdemeanor for facilitating child pornography
> because it allowed access to a bulletin board containing images of a child
> pornographic nature. In February, 2001, the company pled guilty and a
> judge ordered BuffNet to pay a $5,000.00 fine."
>
> This page provides a little more detail:
>
> http://www.exn.ca/Stories/1998/10/29/04.asp
>
> An excerpt from the above page:
>
> "In this case, three ISPs initially were targeted as fronting newsgroups
> that traded in child pornography. One of them canceled its access to the
> site, and has been excused from the investigation.
>
> The other two sites claimed various legal protections, and, as Wurzel
> said, one of them told the undercover investigators that it was "law
> enforcement's job to deal with this."
>
> "So we did," Wurzel said."
>
> Jon
>
> >
> > --
> > gabriel rosenkoetter
> > gr@eclipsed.net
> >
>
>
> --
> Trooper Jon S. Nelson, Linux Certified Admin., CCNA
> Pa. State Police, Bureau of Criminal Investigation
> Computer Crimes Unit
> Work: 610.344.4471 Cell/Page: 866.284.1603
> jonelson@state.pa.us
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
> Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
> General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
>
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|