[WikiEN-l] Why the uproar over wikitruth

[Patrick, Brad]

And before anyone jumps all over me on this, the original case was Reno
v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844, 117 S.Ct. 2329, 138 L.Ed.2d 874. 

-----Original Message-----
From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Patrick, Brad
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 4:10 PM
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Why the uproar over wikitruth

Not in its entirety.  Two sections were invalidated by the US Supreme
Court, involving overbreadth challenges re: pornography and obscene
material.  See generally Ashcroft, 542 U.S. 656, 124 S.Ct. 2783, 159
L.Ed.2d 690.

The relevant section for Wikipedia purposes, 47 USC Section 230, is not
one of them, and it has not been found unconstitutional in any federal
court.  

-----Original Message-----
From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Philip Welch
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 4:00 PM
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Why the uproar over wikitruth

On Apr 21, 2006, at 5:15 AM, Tony Sidaway wrote:

> Under the Communications Decency Act
> which provides a general exemption from third party liability to 
> online information providers, this exemption does not extend to 
> liability for publication by agents of the provider.

Wasn't the CDA ruled unconstitutional back in the 90's?

--
Philip L. Welch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philwelch



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------
Disclaimer under IRS Circular 230: Unless expressly stated otherwise in
this transmission, nothing contained in this message is intended or
written to be used, nor may it be relied upon or used, (1) by any
taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on
the taxpayer under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended and/or
(2) by any person to support the promotion or marketing of or to
recommend any Federal tax transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed in this
message. 

If you desire a formal opinion on a particular tax matter for the
purpose of avoiding the imposition of any penalties, we will discuss the
additional Treasury requirements that must be met and whether it is
possible to meet those requirements under the circumstances, as well as
the anticipated time and additional fees involved. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------
Confidentiality Disclaimer: This e-mail message and any attachments are
private communication sent by a law firm, Fowler White Boggs Banker
P.A., and may contain confidential, legally privileged information meant
solely for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
Please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message, then
delete the e-mail and any attachments from your system. Thank you.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l