The first amendment and cyberspace: Trying to teach old doctrines new tricks

University of Cincinnati Law Review

Volumn 64, Issue 4, 1996, Pages 1383-1436

  Johns, Michael ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030491583     PISSN: 00096881     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (22)

1. WILLIAM GIBSON, NEUROMANCER 51 (1984).
2. HOWARD RHEINGOLD, THE VIRTUAL COMMUNITY 5 (1993).
3. Howard Frederick, Computer Networks and the Emergence of Global Civil Society, in GLOBAL NETWORKS: COMPUTERS AND INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS 283, 283-95 (Linda M. Harasim ed., 1993).
4. Fred H. Cate, The First Amendment and the National Information Infrastructure, 30 WAKE FOREST L. REV. 1, 6 (1995).
5. Michael W. Miller, Tech Talk: An On-Line Discussion Via an Electronic Bulletin Board of the Risks of the Computer Revolution, WALL ST. J., Apr. 6, 1992, at R12 (reference to passages written by Senator Patrick Leahy).
6. Mike Godwin, Problems Policing Pom On-line: Computers and Technology: Community Standards Difficult to Apply in Cyberspace, S.F. EXAMINER, Aug. 14, 1994, at B5.
7. Joyce Price, "Community Standards" Ruling Stands: On-Line Porn Judges by Download Site, WASH. TIMES, Feb. 16, 1996, at A6.
8. Robert F. Goldman, Put Another Log on the Fire, There's a Chill on the Internet: The Effect of Applying Current Anti-Obscenity Laws to Communications, 29 GA. L. REV. 1075, 1119 (1995).
9. William F. Buckley, Constitutional Challenges of the Communications Decency Act Problematic, FRESNO BEE, Mar. 1, 1996, at B5.
10. See Constance Johnson, U.S. Seizure of Electronic Messages in Obscenity Case Prompts Lawsuit, WALL ST. J. EUR., Aug. 22, 1995, at 4.
11. See RHEINGOLD, supra note 2, at 64.
12. See generally Goldman, supra note 199 (discussing how the confusion with respect to law on the Internet will cause a chill to its use).
13. Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49 (1973) (Brennan, J., dissenting) (citing the general policy concerns of vague and confusing law).
14. Goldman, supra note 199, at 1115.
15. Jeffrey E. Faucette, Note, The Freedom of Speech at Risk in Cyberspace: Obscenity Doctrine and a Frightened University's Censorship of Sex on the Internet, 44 DUKE L.J. 1155, 1155 (1995).
16. Henry Cutter, University Shuts Off Computerized Dirty Pictures After Protests, Textual Pornography is Allowed On-line, S.F. EXAMINER, Nov. 24, 1994, at A37.
17. John Schwartz, Some On-line Guidelines are Out of Line With Free Speech Rights, WASH. POST, Oct. 3, 1994, at F25.
18. Tamar Lewin, College Settles in Computer Case, PORTLAND OREGONIAN, Sept. 22, 1994, at A17.
19. Bill Straub, Battling On-line Kid Smut, Dozen Arrested in Sweep of U.S., CINCINNATI POST, Sept. 14, 1995, at A2.
20. Tom Leithauser, Cyberspace Raid Cracks Child-Sex Ring an Orlando FDLE Agent Who Traps Pedophiles Using Computer Networks was Given a Key Role, ORLANDO SENTINEL, Sept. 14, 1995, at A1.
21. See U.S. CONST. amend IV.
22. AL GORE, THE GORE REPORT ON REINVENTING GOVERNMENT (1993).