 One
of the issues we've talked about repeatedly over the years is the
question of what is the internet jurisdiction.
If you think that just because it appears on the internet, anyone's laws
apply, then you reach an untenable situation where all online content is
controlled by the strictest, most draconian rules out there. That makes
little sense.
And yet some courts still think this is the appropriate interpretation
of the law.
In the US it's already troubling enough that the issue of indecency is
measured on an amorphous community standards basis, but when it
comes to the internet, what community applies?
A recent ruling in the 11th Circuit Court of appeals on a pornography
case, the court seems to have made a ruling that effectively says all
online content should be held to the standards of the strictest
communities. Thus, an erotica website targeting a NY subculture should
be held to the standards of a southern bible belt rural community? That
seems ridiculous, but it's what the court said.
In this case, a guy who produced porn content in California was tried
in Tampa, Florida, because investigators downloaded his content there:
The Atlanta-based court rejected arguments by Paul Little (Max
Hardcore)'s attorneys that applying a local community standard to the
Internet violates the First Amendment because doing so means material
can be judged according to the standards of the strictest communities.
Other courts, including one in California, have found differently on
similar questions, so it seems likely that, at some point, this issue
will finally go back to the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, it seems
likely that the Supreme Court will focus on what counts as community
standards rather than whether or not laws against obscenity even
make legal sense under the First Amendment.
|
