Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Obenberger
In a nutshell, the courts have told us that they are not stupid, and what is obviously a pretext ... is not enough.
...
"A quotation from Voltaire in the flyleaf of a book will not constitutionally redeem an otherwise obscene publication ...
these pictures ... are relevant to the theme of the article [so] they reversed the conviction without even requiring the defendant to file a brief.
|
So if I understand correctly, though they
said an obvious pretext wouldn't be sufficient if it was completely unrelated to the work as a whole, they reversed the conviction (the guy got off) because the text and the pictures were thematically related, correct? So adding text along with the pictures did actually work. A Voltaire quotation, being wholly unrelated to the pictures, would not suffice, they said, correct?
Is it your opinion, then, that quotations from court opinions about the first amendment as it applies to nude photos, and commentary thereon, placed alongside examples of such works, would be thematically related and therefore (arguably) fall under Kois?
Assuming that the scholarly work is thematically related as expressed in Kois, so the argument can made, do you believe that's better than not having that argument available at all?
That is to say, which is
easier to defend?:
anal sex videos
Court decisions about anal sex accompanied by anal sex videos
Either could put you in jail, but which is better?
__________________
For historical display only. This information is not current:
support@bettercgi.com ICQ 7208627
Strongbox - The next generation in site security
Throttlebox - The next generation in bandwidth control
Clonebox - Backup and disaster recovery on steroids