View Single Post
Old 08-10-2001, 02:01 AM  
pimplink
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Closer than you think
Posts: 9,535
The Miller standard [defining obscene material as "appealing to a prurient interest in sex with no redeeming literary, artistic, political, or social value as defined by local community standards"]
is easy to defend against if your only market is San Francisco or Santa Monica.

Unfortunately, the recent incidence of "borderless" jurisdiction in obscenity cases scare me. Take the case of the Tennessee inspector that logged onto an amateur porn bbs and was able to prosecute the owners in Tennessee. Also, California, while generally liberal, also has a conservative belt--Orange County, Northern California outside of the coastal counties, etc. I'm sure this describes New York, Massachussetts and other generally "permissive" states.

I'm sorry for sounding paranoid but I'd rather wake people up to these possibilities instead of watching another rerun of the 80's under Ed Meese.
Quote:
Originally posted by Kimmykim:
I don't expect to see much of a change based on her answers.

Maybe on the state level but if Wassermans defense of porn across state lines isn't prosecutable in OK then that would lighten it up for everyone.

The money's still an issue and I don't see the current admin stealing the 300 dollar tax rebate to prosecute anything with lol.

The end remains that Miller's not a federal issue, it's a local issue and if you have prosecutors at the local level who are afraid to challenge it then it's good for the industry --
pimplink is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote