|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 316 responses total. |
aruba
|
|
response 57 of 316:
| 
Jun 16 04:15 UTC 1999 |
Right. Marshall Widick suggested using only a selection of the responses, if
the item was too long.
|
scg
|
|
response 58 of 316:
|
Jun 16 05:16 UTC 1999 |
Ah, ok. I'll certainly defer to the opinion of the attorney on this.
|
dpc
|
|
response 59 of 316:
|
Jun 16 13:35 UTC 1999 |
Right; if our opponents or the judge want to see the full items,
all they have to do is ask. 8-)
|
aruba
|
|
response 60 of 316:
|
Jun 16 15:28 UTC 1999 |
Actually, all they have to do is click.
|
aruba
|
|
response 61 of 316:
|
Jun 17 13:31 UTC 1999 |
I just got mail from Dave Cahill saying that Mike Seinberg told him Cyberspace
Communications is likely to be the lead plaintiff in the case. Apparently
"Cyberspace v. Engler" has a ring to it. So we might get some media
attention after all. This is exciting!
|
dpc
|
|
response 62 of 316:
|
Jun 17 13:42 UTC 1999 |
It looks like Grex will be the *lead plaintiff* in the suit!
Mike Steinberg says they like the ring of "Cyberspace v. Engler".
|
janc
|
|
response 63 of 316:
|
Jun 17 14:21 UTC 1999 |
Amusing.
|
mary
|
|
response 64 of 316:
|
Jun 17 17:38 UTC 1999 |
John and I got a telephone call late last night, from Mr. Steinberg,
giving us a "heads-up" that Grex would most likely be the lead
plaintiff, that the suit would be filed Monday morning, and a
press conference would be scheduled for sometime later that
morning. He asked I attend. I'm trying to make arrangements
to do be there.
|
remmers
|
|
response 65 of 316:
|
Jun 17 17:42 UTC 1999 |
Yes, it's exciting. It is possible that the ACLU might change its
strategy and make another party the lead plaintiff, possibly
depending on who the final list of plaintiffs turns out to be. But
they do feel that we make a very strong plaintiff because of our
structure and mission.
|
janc
|
|
response 66 of 316:
|
Jun 18 12:37 UTC 1999 |
Cool. I've been thinking that it would be a good idea to write a "press
release" document about this. It could use some text from our
declaration, but would at least need a bit more information introducing
what the Act is about, and could stand to be shorter and more compact.
I'd be interested in helping to write such a thing, but I won't be
available for about a week, so we should probably find someone else.
|
aruba
|
|
response 67 of 316:
|
Jun 18 12:44 UTC 1999 |
I can do that. I'll work on it today.
|
scg
|
|
response 68 of 316:
|
Jun 18 14:55 UTC 1999 |
Where and when is the press conference?
|
remmers
|
|
response 69 of 316:
|
Jun 18 18:04 UTC 1999 |
We don't know yet. Somewhere in Detroit. It's not definite yet
that it will happen, only likely. When I know more, I'll post it
here.
Thanks for working on the press release, Mark. Regardless
whether the press conference happens, it will be a useful
document to have.
|
dpc
|
|
response 70 of 316:
|
Jun 18 20:34 UTC 1999 |
Indeed it is.
|
mary
|
|
response 71 of 316:
|
Jun 19 16:56 UTC 1999 |
Mr. Steinberg left a message on our machine today (in response
to a message I left on his) saying that late yesterday afternoon
a decision had been made to file the lawsuit on Tuesday and
not hold a press conference. Instead they'd be supplying the
media with a written statement and contact telephone numbers
for the plaintiffs. He suggested someone will be contacting
me with more information on Monday.
|
aruba
|
|
response 72 of 316:
|
Jun 19 18:15 UTC 1999 |
Here's a draft of a press release:
Cyberspace Communications Inc., a Michigan non-profit corporation that
operates the online community Grex (www.cyberspace.org), has joined a suit to
block the implementation of Michigan Public Act 33 of 1999, which makes it
illegal to transmit "sexually explicit" material to minors. The Act is
scheduled to go into effect on August 1st, 1999. Other plaintiffs in the suit
include the ACLU, [list other plaintiffs here].
Grex (which means "group" in Latin) has been operating since 1991 as an open
access computer system promoting free speech. Its charitable mission includes
allowing people of limited means access to the Internet and providing a place
for people of all ages and backgrounds to exchange ideas. Grex does not
charge any fees to use its system, and anyone with a computer and modem or
access to the Internet may read and post text anonymously. Funding comes
almost entirely from donations, which are tax-deductable. Grex's total gross
income for 1998 was approximately $8200, and the bulk of its assets is a
collection of obsolete computer equipment that fits in a small rented room.
Grex is staffed entirely by volunteers.
Although Public Act 33 is well intentioned, it would make it impossible for
Grex to keep operating as it does now. We currently have about 29,000 active
users all over the world, and 200 new accounts are created daily. Users may
post responses in any of over 100 public forums (conferences), which have
topics such as music, the arts, writing, consumer information, finance, small
businesses, philosophy, living with disabilities, men's and women's issues,
parenting, pets, computer hardware and software, nature, and games. The
conferences currently contain about 42 million words of text, roughly 5 times
as much as a typical 20-volume encyclopedia. Approximately 200 new messages
are posted to the conferences every day. Grex also hosts a live chat area in
which over 5000 short messages are posted daily.
Since users access Grex anonymously, we do not know which users are minors and
which are not. It would take several people working full time to verify the
age of every person who creates an account on Grex, and we do not have the
resources to pay for that. It would be even harder to monitor all the
conferences and the chat area to censor any material which was deemed
"sexually explicit," and difficult to find people qualified to make that
determination.
Furthermore, censorship would have a chilling effect on many valuable
discussions which touch on sexual issues. Very little of the material on Grex
is probably "sexually explicit" under the law, but enforcement of the law
would undoubtedly result in broader censorship than is strictly necessary.
We feel that this is an unacceptable encroachment on the First Amendment
guarantee of free speech.
Cyberspace Communications is a member-owned corporation, and all policy
decisions are made after discussion in an open forum. The discussion about
joining this suit is accessible at
http://www.cyberspace.org/cgi-bin/bt/peek:coop:98
For more information on Grex, visit www.cyberspace.org or call Mary Remmers at
(734) ###-####.
|
scg
|
|
response 73 of 316:
|
Jun 19 19:07 UTC 1999 |
Just a technicality here, but I'm under the impression that we're a
"membership based non-profit corporation," or something like that, and are
not actually owned by the membership or by anybody else.
|
aruba
|
|
response 74 of 316:
|
Jun 19 21:50 UTC 1999 |
Hmmm; I suppose that makes sense. The articles of incorporation say that
"The corporation is organized on a membership basis" and that no part of its
net earnings shall be distributed to its members. SO it's true that the
members don't own CCI in the same way that stockholders own, say, Exxon. But
is it true that *no one* owns CCI?
Anyway, I'll change it.
|
mdw
|
|
response 75 of 316:
|
Jun 19 21:56 UTC 1999 |
Grex is a michigan not-for-profit, operated by the members for the
benefit of the public.
|
aruba
|
|
response 76 of 316:
|
Jun 19 22:29 UTC 1999 |
Before we get too caught up in how to identify ourselves - does anyone think
the press release is too long or too short? Anything important that I left
out? Would it interest a reporter in doing a story about Grex?
|
mdw
|
|
response 77 of 316:
|
Jun 19 22:59 UTC 1999 |
If it's too long, the newspaper will trim it down. It's best to design
it like a newspaper article, ie, it should be possible to chop off the
last N paragraphs (where N ranges from 1 to the # of paragraphs in the
release) and it should still make perfect sense. After this, it's
probably better for it to be too long than too short, within reason.
|
other
|
|
response 78 of 316:
|
Jun 20 05:34 UTC 1999 |
as a corporation, i think CCI 'owns' itself. i thought that at a basic
level, this was what the concept of incorporation was all about. the
company becomes an entity which in some ways parallels individual
persons as far as the state is concerned.
|
mary
|
|
response 79 of 316:
|
Jun 20 12:57 UTC 1999 |
Thanks, Mark, for writing this up. I don't think it's too long but I
would like to share some thoughts. I think it's a mistake to spend much
time explaining the volume of text published here or trying to convey how
it would be a big job to moderate the content. Someone concerned about
the their child's safety isn't going to care a whole lot about our
workload - they're probably going to be thinking that unless we can do a
good job at running this system we shouldn't be doing it at all.
And if we were truthful it wouldn't matter if we had the staff-power to
scan every single word and verify each account - we still wouldn't do so.
It's not what we're about.
I'd rather we focused on how this law is not only unnecessary (existing
laws on child pornography and obscenity apply to the Internet) but that it
will put many valuable community resource organizations (like Grex) in
jeopardy. The term "sexually explicit" is too vague to be useful. We've
had serious and enlightening discussions on Grex about circumcision, body
image issues, AIDS, abortion, birth, pornography laws, prostitution, and
so on. We'd no longer be able to provide a forum for such subjects if this
law were allowed to stand. And, even though these topics make up a very
small part of the spectrum, they are of value.
If we're going to address validation and censorship issues I'd suggest
something like this:
One of the ways Grex fosters lively debate is by encouraging any and all to
participate and share their point-of-view. Insisting participants first
register, then wait for an ID check, then submit their comments to
moderators who would filter for content, would clearly limit participation
and stifle discussion. We don't see censorship as a good communication
tool. Grex tends to rely on peer-pressure as needed with an emphasis
on tolerance, and it works.
Anyhow, my 2 cents on the approach. Maybe we could group-think
a cut-and-paste here and come up with a final wording after
more folks have added their suggestions?
|
aruba
|
|
response 80 of 316:
|
Jun 20 14:16 UTC 1999 |
Sure, sounds good. I showed the declaration to a non-Grexer friend, and he
said the numbers were the most impressive thing about it to him; that's why
I featured them so strongly. I think we should leave them in, but emphasizing
the social reasons for our decision is not bad, either. I just want to get
across that we are of limited means, since people may start reading with the
preconception that we are a huge bloodsucking corporation.
|
i
|
|
response 81 of 316:
|
Jun 20 21:45 UTC 1999 |
I'd guess that the "we're of very limited means" numbers will speak
strongly to a medium-sized subset of readers, the rest will be deaf;
while the "it would be a huge job" numbers will similarly speak to a
smallish subset. I think that mary's approach would reach many of
those deaf to the numbers; i'd try to work a nicer wording of 'free
speach for common people like THIS MEANS YOU' into it somehow.
|