|
|
|
|
|
|
by cvalka
1267 days ago
|
|
|
1. Your idea compelling the websites to provide the header will survive the 1st amendment scrutiny. I support this.
2. Your idea compelling the client software to respect the header will probably not survive the 1st amendment and is not really needed. Google/Apple will ship this functionality on their own.
3. Seizing domains is not universal. How will you seize an
.am or .su domain?
4. One more anti porn idea to throw some meat to the evangelical base - remove copyright protection for porn. 1. Constitutional 2. Does not restrict freedom of speech 3. Removes incentives to produce new "professional" porn |
|
|
In theory I would use the over-sized hammer of sanctions. Not perfect, not nice but it gets results.
Your idea compelling the client software to respect the header will probably not survive the 1st amendment
I don't think it has to. There are plenty of controls on the internet that could be seen as interfering with speech such as forbidding kiddie-porn or threats of harm against people. I believe empowering parents to block porn does not in any way interfere with the U.S. constitution. The owner of a device still has the choice to allow or block whatever they wish. But I am not a supreme court judge. We should test this.
remove copyright protection for porn
There enlies the rub. That would remove most incentives to produce commercial porn. This leaves only self hosted amateurs and probably then even a sub-set... probably mostly exhibitionists as they can no longer make significant amounts of money from it, probably just some donations to get the actors to do custom things. Great for voyeurs however would quickly get boring for many others. "Put shoe on head" would still be a thing