[Wikipedia-l] Re: Two issues here: what is legal to have on the server and what is legal in the user's nation

Thu May 22 21:46:41 UTC 2003

On Thu, 2003-05-22 at 16:38, Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:
> > (The Cunctator <cunctator at kband.com>):
> > 
> > Yes there are: try child prOn, indecency and obscenity laws.
> 
> Those are not restrictions on "nudity". Nude pictures of children
> are perfectly legal in the US, as long as they're not engaged in
> sexual acts or otherwise presented as erotic. And even some that
> are clearly erotic are acceptable in some circumstances ("Pretty
> Baby" and "American Beauty" come to mind).

Yep, there are no restrictions on nude pictures unless someone doesn't
like them--or does like them. Also, while there's no federal statute on
public nudity, there are plenty of local restrictions and no
Constitutional protection.

C.f. Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629, 639-43 (1968), Osborne v. Ohio,
495 U.S.103, 111 (1990), Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996, 18
U.S.C. § 2252A. But hey, this is all being hammered out by the courts. 

> > But this isn't a disgreement about facts, just which facts are
> > important. I should have said "I think it's grossly misleading". 
> 
> Agreed. I just thought it a bit unfair to demonize the MPAA when
> for the most part it is the American public itself that's the
> problem.  Our prudery is not a case of an authoritarian minority
> oppressing the freedom-loving masses; it's a case of the
> authoritarian masses oppressing the freedom-loving minority.
> It is not a failure of democracy, but a natural negative
> consequence of it.

That's one reading of the situation. Mine is that both the authoritarian
minority and authoritarian masses are to blame.