Re: [off-topc] ISP responsibility, was Re: European DB-law was: Re: SpamWhack

• From: Roland Perry < >
• Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:49:58 +0000

In article <Pine.LNX.4.30.0101221153511.17824-100000@localhost>,
Paul Wouters paul@localhost writes
>Some comments after a quick glance on that page (or why we wouldn't sign it):

I think you've been looking at the Illegal Material BCP. In this
discussion it's just the UBE BCP which is relevant.

http://www.linx.net/noncore/bcp/ube-bcp.html

But thanks for the comments. In general we do indeed have problems with
"illegal material" definitions, with only Child Pornography a certainty.
Our Government wants us to look at "Hate speech" and in just the last
few days we've been hit with demands related to the future ban of
Tobacco Advertising, and the existing ban on "Babies for sale".

http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/twins/story/0,7369,426306,00.html
-- 
            Roland Perry | tel: +44 1733 207705 | roland@localhost
             Interim CEO | fax: +44 1733 207729 | http://www.linx.net
London Internet Exchange | mbl: +44 7050 604080 |       /contact/roland

• Post To The List:

• References:
  • Re: European DB-law was: Re: SpamWhack
    • From: Roland Perry
  • [off-topc] ISP responsibility, was Re: European DB-law was: Re:SpamWhack
    • From: Paul Wouters