<html>
Hey!<br>
<br>
In Holland the official reasons given for closing down MSN's chat are the
proliferation of spam, porn and paedophilia. Microsoft's strategy to make
their Internet division profitable is also mentioned as a reason for the
closure, likely being the main one. <br>
There's quite some news coverage, though in general the closing isn't
seen as a very big deal. There are several other chat services, which are
more popular, especially amongst the youth. To control the content on
those services one often has to provide an ID, which puts an end to the
anonymity of the user. This will also the case for the
("future") paid service in the US, Japan and Canada.
Identidication of users, taking away their anonymity by technical or
legal measures, is (becoming) one of the main tools of (speech)-control
on the net. The US First Amendment, by the way, does protect pornography.
Child pornograpy is excluded, on its own and as a form of obscenity,
which is overall excluded from protection. The line between pornography
and obscenity can be hard to make, as shown by past litigation. To draw
a line between the two has a cultural basis anyway, and to call
pornographers a pest is a personal, and not a legal qualification. <br>
<br>
Rik Lambers<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
At 23:05 24-9-2003 -0700, you wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote><blockquote type=cite cite>
<dl>
<dd>Steve Jones wrote :<br>
<br>
<dd>> Given the international membership on this list I'd be very
<dd>> interested in hearing reactions to MSN's announcement from
outside
<dd>> the U.S. The news stories I heard about it on the radio in the
U.S.
<dd>> emphasized spam and porn as being the reasons for the closing.
Is
<dd>> that the reporting elsewhere?<br>
<br>
<dd> <br>
<br>
<dd>Hi, <br>
<br>
<dd>I'm in Singapore temporarily ( somewhat ironically, teaching New
Media and International Communication) and the news I have
heard/read/seen has emphasised paedophile/spam as the reasons for
the Microsoft decision.<br>
<br>
<dd>I agree with other posts that the decision is also likely to be
connected to commercial reasons ( Hi, Microsoft lurkers - you can tick
that box), I also wonder if there may be legal reasons, as laws in each
country in relation to paedophilia and the internet seem to vary -
eg we saw recently how Pete Townsend was caught up in a paedophile
inquiry as a result of downloading material for 'research', and then
there was the famous German case where the CEO ( name??) was prosecuted
for trading in pornography - perhaps there are also reasons that
Microsoft has identified which are related to the potential for
litigation by victims of paedophilia/spam. The US first amendment, after
all, provides rare legal protection (?) for
pornographers/paedophiles and other pests ( netmarketers). <br>
<br>
<dd>Do any legal experts have a view on this?<br>
<br>
<dd>Collette Snowden<br>
<br>
<dd>University of South Australia<br>
<br>
<dd> <br>
<br>
</dl><br>
Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://shopping.yahoo.com/?__yltc=s%3A150000443%2Cd%3A22708228%2Cslk%3Atext%2Csec%3Amail">The
New Yahoo! Shopping</a> - with improved product search</blockquote><br>
<br>
<div>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</div>
<br>
<div>Rik Lambers</div>
<div>Institute for Information Law (IViR)</div>
<div>University of Amsterdam</div>
<div>Rokin 84</div>
<div>1012 KX Amsterdam</div>
<div>Tel.: + 31 20 525 3321</div>
<div>Fax.: + 31 20 525 3033</div>
<div><a href="http://www.ivir.nl/" EUDORA=AUTOURL>http://www.ivir.nl</a></div>
<br>
</html>