HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jheath@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath)
Newsgroups: alt.sex,misc.legal,rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Censorship of nudity -- babies in movies
Date: 8 Apr 92 13:53:41 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Center for Environmental and Regulatory Information Systems, Purdue University

From article <1992Apr08.003227.12511@mixcom.com>, by calyx.corp@mixcom.mixcom.com (calyx.corp):
>>There's also the movie "Crossing Delancy" with Amy Irving and Peter 
>>Rigert(sp?) Where Izzy attends the briss of her friend's son and not only do 
>>they show the baby on the table, they also show the fact that he decides to 
>>relieve himself 1/2 way through the rabbi's speech. 
> 
>>Is there an official definiton of what's legal and what isn't? Or is this
>>another one of those federal vs. state issues?
> 
> I saw this scene, and was very surprised.  Why is it legal to show
> a urinating baby (for entertainment purposes!) in a movie accessible
> to minors, yet it is illegal for anyone to pay to see still or moving
> pictures of a toddler's or other minor's nudity.  The issue does not
> seem to be the intrinsic "evil" of the nudity, nor of the public's
> perverse entertainment value of a urinating child.  The concern seems
> to be the psychological harm to the child.  Apparently it is not
> illegal to charge admission to see a urinating baby because that child
> is not traumatized by such "abuse"; photographing nude children
> for pornographic purposes is apparently illegal because such children
> are usually coerced to pose and/or otherwise abused, which usually ends up
> being traumatic for the child.
>

It isn't just for "pornographic" purposes.  There was a piece on
60 minutes, last fall I think, about a photographer who was
arrested and had his entire life work confiscated because he had
some pictures of nude children (as far as I could tell, _no_ sex
acts were portrayed).  I understand that the negatives and prints
were later returned (damaged), but the guy was out big $ for
lawyers and such.  BTW, the parents of the kids gave their
permission and were there when the pictures were taken.   

I understand that parents who have pictures of their kids in the
buff have been prosecuted or gone after by the child protective
services.  It is my further understanding that in some cases
these folks have gone to jail or lost their kids.
-- 
"Land of song, said the warrior bard,           Jim Heath
Though all the world betrays thee.
One sword, at least, thy rights shall guard, (The Minstrel Boy)
One faithful harp will praise thee."         (Thomas More)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: jkogan@eff.org (Julia Kogan)
Subject: Photos of minors
Originator: jkogan@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 11:20:48 GMT

Carl, for once you're not completely right:  there is settled law on
possession of child pornography.  See Osborne v. Ohio, 58 U.S.L.W. 4467
(1990), in which the Court upheld a statute criminalizing even private
possession of sexually explicit nude photos of children.  Rationale:  
to prevent exploitation and abuse of children.

-- 
Julia Kogan                     |  These opinions are not my employer's,
jkogan@eff.org                  |  nor are they legal advice.
Boston University School of Law |
From: jheath@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Laser Speed Detectors (was Re: On the legality of
Date: 8 Apr 92 17:31:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: CERIS.1992Apr8.173136.5838
Organization: Center for Environmental and Regulatory Information Systems, Purdue University

From article <1992Apr8.085331.25527@leland.Stanford.EDU>, by tedebear@leland.Stanford.EDU (Theodore Chen):
> In article <1992Mar27.130902.1161@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil> bkottmann@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil (Brett Kottmann) writes:
>>	Find out what color the locals are using (color of the laser, that is)
>>and then have your car painted that color :).
> 
> what if it's an infrared laser?

I think you'd want to paint it black.
-- 
"Land of song, said the warrior bard,           Jim Heath
Though all the world betrays thee.
One sword, at least, thy rights shall guard, (The Minstrel Boy)
One faithful harp will praise thee."         (Thomas More)
From: otzj@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: copyright infringment?
Date: 16 Apr 92 10:59:01 EDT
Distribution: misc
Organization: Cornell University

   At the moment I am writing a piece of software which allows the players
of a certain boardgame/simulation to keep track of their various pieces and
units which are in the game.  What I want to know is whether I will tread on
any kind of rights if I try to sell this program which uses all of the data
and rules from the game in question.  The program is meant to assist the
play of this game, not to computerize or to replace it.  The program explains
none of the game rules, nor does it have a copy of the map board, so it is
my belief and intent that the original game must still be purchased by 
anyone who has a copy of my program.  If you have any suggestions on where
I might find a resolution to this question, please send them directly to
me as I do not read this group.  Thanks, Ken Stuart
otzj@cornella.cit.cornell.edu

(oh, of course I will give credit to the original game and state that ownership
of the game is required to use the software.)
From: tim@mwhhlaw
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Wills, etc.
Date: 15 Apr 92 15:48:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: mwhhlaw.1992Apr15.154833.431
Reply-To: uunet!mwhhlaw!tim
Organization: Martin_Wade_Hartley_&_Hollingsworth

In article <167C8999E.ARL00SJB@UNCCVM.UNCC.EDU> ARL00SJB@UNCCVM.UNCC.EDU  
writes:
> The question is, if someone dies, when does the reading of the will take
> place, and how do interested parties find out when that reading will be?
> This is assuming that those parties' names might not be in the will, but
> they want to find out what the bequests are?  *Must* a will be read, or can
> the person who made it legally bar the reading of the will at all?

The "Reading of the Will" is a quaint practice that has no legal significance.  
I assume your real questions are:
1.  When does a will become a legally effective document?
	Answer- When admitted to probate.
2.  When is a will admitted to probate?
	Answer- After death, and usually within a time limit set forth in a  
statute adopted by the state.
3.  Can anyone see the the will?
	Answer-  In my state (Indiana) a will admitted to probate is a public  
recorded and can be review by anyone at the Courthouse.
4.  Must a will be offered for probate?
	Answer-  We have a statute that mandates the production of any will  
discovered.
5.  How can I find the will and read it?
	Answer- Call or go to the County Courthouse and find out if an "estate  
has been opened" (buzzwords).  Get the file number and ask to review the file.

--
Tim Hollingsworth
Newsgroups: misc.legal,misc.legal.computing,alt.privacy,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.society.civil-liberties
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: REQUEST: E-mail Privacy Legal Issues
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 12:28:37 GMT

I'm interested in asking the collective knowledge of the net whether
they have any information on corporate liability for:

(1) E-mail/corporate mail messages posted by employees (libel, etc.)
(2) Unauthorized reading of private electronic mail
(3) E-mail privacy issues in general.

Any law review articles or cases on the subject will be immensely helpful.
E-mail or post, but no flames please.  
-- 
Ted Frank          + "A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged, it
1307 E 60 St, #109 +  is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in
U o' C Law Skool   +  color and content according to the circumstances and
Chi, IL 60637      +  the time in which it is used."  --  Holmes
From: nagatkin@mdd.comm.mot.com (Michael Nagatkin)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Living Trusts
Summary: question on Living Trusts
Keywords: trusts
Date: 10 Apr 92 18:17:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: mdd.1992Apr10.181740.3667
Organization: Motorola, Mobile Data Division - Seattle, WA


  Does making a Living Trust amount to just filling out 
  a form and getting it signed? I would like to find out
  a quick and simple way to deal with avoiding probate.
  Please post responses.



-- 

 Thanks, Michael Nagatkin
 nagatkin@mdd.comm.mot.com
 ...!uunet!mdisea!nagatkin
From: jkogan@eff.org (Julia Kogan)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Hate Crimes statute .. NOT (was Re: Where is B-CPU, you ask?)
Date: 4 Apr 92 01:48:06 GMT
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Originator: jkogan@eff.org

In <1992Apr2.222347.16034@gtephx.UUCP>, forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Pheonix, Arizona) writes:

>On the other hand, copyright laws protect the photo, not the 1's and 0's 
>placed in a file.  Strictly speaking scanning is not a duplication of the
>orginal. 
>
>Copyright laws were written long before digitizing came into effect.
>Does anybody know if there have been any modifications made for
>computers AND/OR files containing ditized information?

And in <1992Apr3.90855.7774@ms.uky.edu>, morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) writes:

>If you argue these points, you're entering the world of "derivative works",
>which is explicitly covered by the copyright law.

Two points:  first, section 117 of the 1976 Copyright Act now allows authors
to copyright computer programs (1980 amendment).  17 U.S.C.A. @ 117.
In addition, source and object code are frequently given Cop. protection.
See Apple Computer, Inc. v. Franklin Comp. Corp., 714 F.2d 1240 (3d Cir.1983).

Secondly, the copying need not be an exact duplication of the 1's and 0's.
It is a violation if it simulates the "look and feel" of the program.  The
common example seems to be rip-off video games like fake Pac-Mans, with
characters that gobble up bits just like the original Pac-Man.  But courts
won't always protect programs that mainly contain graphs, columns, etc.
The more creative the user interface is (art-filled, etc.), the more likely
it is that a court will find for the injured plaintiff.

Finally, I suppose you may be interested in these code sections:

The Copyright Act grants the author the exclusive right to prepare
derivate works in 17 U.S.C.A. @ 106(2).      
A "derivative work" is a recording, translation, arrangement, etc., "or any
other form in which a work may be recast, transformed or adapted."
17 U.S.C.A. @ 101.
-- 
Julia Kogan                     |  These opinions are not my employer's,
jkogan@eff.org                  |  nor are they legal advice.
B.U. Law                        |
Xref: sparky misc.legal:9192 alt.society.civil-liberty:3396
From: deej@gorilla.nbn.com (Donna Corner Holmes)
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: Re: jury nullification
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 08:55:08 PDT
Organization: Summary Insight

mlee@esd.dl.nec.com (Michael Lee) writes:

> From article <VZRPiB3w164w@gorilla.nbn.com>, by deej@gorilla.nbn.com (Donna C
> > arg@huxley.bitstream.com (Adam R. Grossman) writes:
> >
> >> I still think the most fair thing is for people to be
> >> convicted when they have violated statutes and acquitted when they have no
> >> (or if there is reasonable doubt.)
> >>
> >> If you think its such  a good thing  for juries to  ignore the law wheneve
> >> they feel like it, I have to wonder: why have laws?
> >> --
> >
> > I'm afraid I have to agree here. There are other ways to get laws changed,
> > and a better way to make your point would be to get yourself nixed from
> > the jury in the first place by saying that you disagree with the law and
> > and therefore cannot uphold it. If everyone started doing what is suggested
> > in terms of jury nullification, it could result in total anarchy and a
> > failed legal system. Granted, the system is in poor shape in many ways and
> > could use some revamping, but I do not believe this is the appropriate
> > method.
> 
> This is an interesting view of "Justice" - that if one person is found
> guilty and punished for breaking a bad statute, everyone else must be also
> convicted and punished for breaking the same bad statute.

But who is to judge which statutes are "bad?"  If one or two people out of
10 million don't like a statute do they have the right to place their 
judgment over and against the others?  "Justice" would best be served by
changing bad law, not by ignoring them. 

> Many northern states had statutes requiring escaped slaves to be returned
> to their former masters.  Northern juries decided these were bad statutes
> and refused to convict the former slave and send him/her back to the former
> owner.  Then, the northern states repealed the "fugitive slave statutes".

These were entire bodies of people (the views of the entire north) that were
deciding to change statutes that were morally wrong.  This thread started,
I believe, in discussions about whether to convict people for possession of
drugs, and I hardly think the two can be compared.

> You seem to be suggesting that justice would be served if more of those
> escaped slaves had been returned to slavery.

No, I'm not. There was a civil war over that issue in which two halves of
the country had different views on a morality issue. That's not the same
thing as one or two people deciding to ignore a law just because they don't
like it.



***********************************************************************
Donna Corner Holmes (deej@gorilla.nbn.com)
Summary Insight (Deposition Summaries) - San Rafael, CA  (415) 488-1659
***********************************************************************
Xref: sparky alt.sex:14330 misc.legal:9234 rec.arts.tv:9531
From: rjg@umnstat.stat.umn.edu (Robert J. Granvin)
Newsgroups: alt.sex,misc.legal,rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Censoship of nudity (was Re: Photo of minor: is it illegal to possess?
Date: 13 Apr 92 17:06:53 GMT
Organization: School of Statistics, University of Minnesota

In article <1992Apr9.215907.18456@bilver.uucp>, alex@bilver.uucp (Alex Matulich) writes:
|> "Life of Brian" showed a full-frontal nude shot of Brian at one point.
|> The scene where he gets out of bed and walks out the door to face a
|> cheering crowd.
|> 
|> It was NOT rated X nor NC-17.

... and pre-dated NC-17 by an incredible amount and didn't "qualify" for
an X rating.
From: de@moscom.UUCP (David Esan)
Newsgroups: alt.sex,misc.legal,rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Censorship of nudity -- babies in movies
Date: 9 Apr 92 13:35:59 GMT
Reply-To: de@moscom.UUCP (David Esan)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Moscom Corp., Pittsford, NY

In article <1992Apr8.135341.3401@CERIS.Purdue.EDU> jheath@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath) writes:
>It isn't just for "pornographic" purposes.  There was a piece on
>60 minutes, last fall I think, about a photographer who was
>arrested and had his entire life work confiscated because he had
>some pictures of nude children (as far as I could tell, _no_ sex

<More stuff deleted>

There is probably nothing inherently wrong with naked pictures of your
own children, assuming they are the standard silly kid in the bath, or
escaping from diapering variety.  You take them not for sexual thrills,
but because they are a pleasant memory.

The LAW on child pornography probably will classify them as pornography.

Now it is really up to the police, the DA, and the judges to decide on 
the meaning of the law.  A good one will never arrest you, or prosecute,
or convict.  One who is need of points with his superiors or his voters
or needs to justify his job (how many child pornographers are there in
your town?) will go overboard in their actions.

Just this week there was such a case decided in federal court.  A man was
bombarded for 2.5 years with offers of child pornography.  Finally he bought
some, and was arrested.  It seems that the Feds had been mailing him 
literature for all that time.  The judge ruled that he wouldn't have bought
it if the Feds hadn't badgered him, and supplied him, and that was 
entrapment.

In a more bizarre case, a mother was separated from her child for over
a year in Syracuse, NY.  Her crime?  She called to ask if it was normal
to get sexually aroused while nursing her baby.  Her baby was about 2 at
the time (many mothers nurse that long or longer).  The social workers
considered her a potential child abuser and took the baby away.  It took
over a year to convince a judge that it was not unusual to nurse a child
to age 2 (in many parts of the world this goes on much longer), and that
her feelings were also not unusual.

This is rapidly going away from rec.arts.tv.  Let me close by noting that
pornography is in the eye of the beholder, and we must watch the watchers.


-- 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 -->     David Esan      de@moscom.com  
 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: protein@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Chris Blackmon)
Subject: Roberts Rules of Order
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 20:35:17 GMT

Anybody know where I can get a copy/listing of the Roberts Rules of Order?
(Any ftp site available?)

Chris Blackmon, N4VGK		||  In this business, you either lead, follow
protein@catt.ncsu.edu		||  or get the hell out of the way.

"pour aller ou personne n'est jamais alle'...."
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Subject: Re: Another Gun Thread Gets Cross-Posted
To: Joe.Francis@dartmouth.edu
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 21:12:53 GMT

In article <1992Apr6.224331.11723@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Joe.Francis@dartmouth.edu (Joe Francis) writes:
>In article <10317@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>> So tell me, do we similarly restrict free speech to the sort of
>> printing presses used in 1791?  We either take an expansive view
>> of "press", "speech", and "arms", or we take the narrow definition
>> based on 1791 technology.
>
>Are you claiming that those who prefer an "expansive view" of free
>speech but prefer a "narrower definition" of our arms rights are
>hypocritical?  If so, would you please explain how you arrived at this
>conclusion?

Because your theory of constitutional interpretation is inconsistent,
or rather, it is rooted in a distinction that the BoR explicitly
rejects.

BTW - 1990s gun technology is closer to 1790s gun technology than
1990s press technology is to 1790s press technology.

>Perhaps if the second amendment had read "...the right of the people to
>defend themselves in any way available against right wing bigots who
>desire to dictate their private lives using the force of
>government...", I would be able to see your point.

Nope, it only says "arms".  It doesn't necessarily include things that
aren't "arms" that one can "keep and bear", just as the 1st doesn't
explicitly protect things other than speech, the press, etc.  Of
course, one could consistently argue that "arms" should be interpreted
broadly, for the same reasons that "speech" and "press" are....

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: cac5961@usl.edu (Castor Christian A)
Subject: Discrimination of resident aliens
Organization: University of Southwestern Louisiana
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 18:19:11 GMT



I have tried twice to receive financial aid from my University (in
the form of scholarships,grants,employment,etc.) and both times
they refused to help me on the grounds that I am not an US citizen.
They claim that financial aid is only available to US Citizen. I am
a permanent US resident.  The University is state supported (ie public).
   Well, I did some research on the library, and found a book
called "The Rights Of Aliens" by David Carliner.   Browsing
through the book, I came to a section entitled "Receiving Goverment
Benefits."  I'm quoting the relevant text in here: 
   "Schooling is available for pemanent resident aliens on the same
conditions as for citizens. As the Supreme Court's decision in
'Graham v. Richardson' indicates, any discrimination between citizens 
and resident aliens in public educational institutions would be
unconstitutional. [SOME TEXT SKIPPED.] A federal District Court
in the Virgin Islands earlier held that territorial scholarship
funds for higher education could not be limited to citizens (Chapman
v. Gerard, 341 F. Supp 1170[1970],aff'd 456 F.2d 577),  and
a three-judge court in New York invalidated a requirement that
financial aid for students is limited to citizens or intending citizens.
The latter decision is being reviewed by the US Supreme Court 
during 1977 (Nyquist v. Mauclet, 406 F. Supp. 1233,cert. granted 
45 LW 3321 [Nov. 2, 1976]; 45 C.F.R. 148.13)."
   The probelm is that the book was printed in 1977, and it
doesn't say what was the outcome of the Supreme Court review regarding
this case.  Does anyone have any information on this?
I'll also welcome any advice,suggestions, or comments.

  - chris

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
  cac5961@usl.edu or chris@usl.edu -  CIS: 73030,2734 - (318) 232-2045 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: jkogan@eff.org (Julia Kogan)
Subject: Re: Justice Thomas (was Socialism Security Rides Again)
Originator: jkogan@eff.org
Keywords: Sandra Slaps Clarence
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Distribution: usa 
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 06:30:46 GMT

In article <1992Apr11.010738.25223@adobe.com> mmwang@adobe.com (Michael Wang) writes:
>
>From my recollection, Thomas said to the effect, "I don't believe
>that beatings in jails constitutes 'cruel and unusual punishment.'"
>The other person that agreed with him was Scalia. Everybody else
>believed that those beatings were unconstitutional (I believe they
>upheld the state court's ruling).
>
Furthermore, as I recall, O'Connor, speaking for the majority, actually 
chastised the dissenters for their own cruelty.


-- 
Julia Kogan                     |  These opinions are not my employer's,
jkogan@eff.org                  |  nor are they legal advice.  Ask me _after_
Boston U., Law '92 -- May 27!   |  I pass the Bar, and I'll tell you the truth.
From: aetsbja-ans-tech@ansbach-emh1.army.mil (Thomas F. Pockberger)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Legal Translater Jobs
Date: 7 Apr 92 18:50:23 GMT

Sorry for the cross posting and sorry for the question, but more than 1000 miles
away from the US this is the only communication medium I have.

We have an certified, University trained interpreter (with diploma) for English
German and French here. 

She will be leaving to the states in a few month.

Where can she start hunting for a job.

She is specialized in legal translations.
(Otherwise I wouldn't post for her ;-)

Thanks for you help

Pocky

Thomas F. Pockberger
LAN Administrator

Internet - personal:  pockbert@ansbach-emh1.army.mil
Internet - Office:    aetsbja-ans-tech@ansbach-emh1.army.mil
-------------------------------------------------------------------
3rd ID, HQ			         | Phone Civ  [49] (9802) 832108
Office of the Staff Judge Advocate       |	      ETS  4672-108
ATTN: AETSBJA-KAT (Katterbach Law Center)| Fax   Civ  [49] (9802) 832109
APO AE 09250			         |	      ETS  4672-109
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard disclaimer (You know, the expression are mine etc......)

		     "Ignorance hates knowledge"