Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

Barbara Nitke loses in USSC


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Alternative Lifestyles in the News >> Barbara Nitke loses in USSC Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 5:22:05 PM   
JohnWarren


Posts: 3807
Joined: 3/18/2005
From: Delray Beach, FL
Status: offline
I just received the following message from NCSF. Note that the Court ruled without even hearing oral arguments.

We may see more websites self censoring or even going out of business.


> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>
> National Coalition for Sexual Freedom
>
> Contact:
> Susan Wright, NCSF Spokesperson
> (917) 848-6544
>
> Supreme Court Decision in the Communications Decency Act (CDA)
>
> March 20, 2006 - Washington D.C. b Today the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed
> the
> Federal District Court's decision in Barbara Nitke and NCSF v. Alberto
> Gonzales,
> the challenge to the Communications Decency Act, #01 CIV 11476 (RMB). The
> Supreme
> Court has affirmed the lower court's decision without hearing oral
> arguments,
> sending a clear signal that the court will not protect free speech rights
> when it
> comes to sexually explicit materials.
>
> The NCSF and Nitke lawsuit was successful in weakening the Miller standard
> of
> judging obscenity: the District Court for the Southern District of NY made
> a
> factual finding that the SLAPS prong of Miller does not provide protection
> against
> prosecution as it was intended to do. The Miller decision (1973) stated
> that
> materials were constitutionally protected if the work, taken as a whole,
> has "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." However
> the
> District court accepted evidence from NCSF and Nitke that prosecutors and
> juries in
> more restrictive communities are less likely to extend protection to
> artistic and
> literary materials that are outside the mainstream of traditional
> sexuality.
>
> "We have proven that Miller does not work," says Susan Wright,
> Spokesperson for
> NCSF. "But the Supreme Court has declined to strike it down at this time.
> That
> means every website on the Internet can be judged by the most repressive
> local
> community standards in the U.S."
>
> The Supreme Court decision shows the importance of supporting NCSF, one of
> the few
> organizations proactively fighting obscenity laws. The CDA makes it a
> crime to post
> obscenity on the Internet because those materials may be viewed by
> children. NCSF
> and Nitke believe that adults should have the right to post and view
> sexually
> explicit materials involving consenting adults on the Internet.
>
> "We knew that the Bush administration was laying its plans to prosecute
> sexually
> explicit material on the Internet," says John Wirenius, attorney for the
> plaintiffs. "By filing our lawsuit in 2001, we may have slowed the Justice
> Department from prosecuting obscenity in 2002-3, but the number of
> obscenity
> prosecutions has steadily increased ever since. We believe in fighting
> this battle
> and we took our fight all the way to the Supreme Court."
>
> "I think we've achieved a great victory in drawing attention to how
> politicized our
> judicial system has become," says co-plaintiff Barbara Nitke, a fine art
> photographer who explores sexual relationships in her work. "Our obscenity
> laws are
> outmoded, especially in conjunction with the Internet. We've made a huge
> dent in
> how obscenity will be judged in the future, and I hope others will now
> stand up and
> continue to fight against repressive laws like this."
>
> NCSF and Barbara Nitke would like to thank everyone who contributed to
> fund this
> important lawsuit, as well as the many dedicated witnesses and lawyers who
> assisted
> in bringing this case to court. In particular, NCSF and Nitke thank John
> Wirenius
> for his outstanding efforts in this case and his dedication to First
> Amendment
> rights. NCSF intends to continue the fight against obscenity laws in the
> U.S.
>
> National Coalition for Sexual Freedom - www.ncsfreedom.org
> Barbara Nitke - www.barbaranitke.com
>
> ###
>
> A project of NCSF
>
> The National Coalition for Sexual Freedom is a national organization
> committed to
> creating a political, legal, and social environment in the United States
> that
> advances equal rights of consenting adults who practice forms of
> alternative sexual
> expression. NCSF is primarily focused on the rights of consenting adults
> in the SM-
> leather-fetish, swing, and polyamory communities, who often face
> discrimination
> because of their sexual expression.
>
> National Coalition for Sexual Freedom
> 822 Guilford Avenue, Box 127
> Baltimore, MD 21202-3707
> 410-539-4824
> [email protected]
> www.ncsfreedom.org
>
> Please cross-post


_____________________________

www.lovingdominant.org
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 6:12:28 PM   
DiannaVesta


Posts: 1087
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Mid-Atlantic area
Status: offline
This is really sad & I admire the stand she took, however the laws have clearly been posted and they are there for a reason.  

“The law requires that those sending obscene communications on the Internet take reasonable actions to keep it away from children, like requiring a credit card, debit account or adult access code as proof of age.”
 

 Exactly what “obscene communications” means, still is not clear, however publishing sexual images or video without any type of protection from minors is clearly defined.   It takes work and an act of responsibility. In my opinion it doesn’t matter if it’s conceived as art or other.

I know the boundaries are sensitive in the case of freedom; however as a mother I am glad the laws were in place.
  My only hope is that this will not set any precedence or begin opening new doors that will create a witch hunt. We’ve seen enough of those.  

Thank you John for posting this.

Dianna


< Message edited by DiannaVesta -- 3/20/2006 6:17:56 PM >


_____________________________



(in reply to JohnWarren)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 6:12:48 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
hmmm.  Oh well.  I have no sympathy for them at all.  If you want to peddle your smut, be prepared to pay the price.  Lining your pockets from the lowest common denominator in society is not protected, as has clearly been spoken to.  Like it or lump it is all I have to say.

You pays your money and you takes your choice.  I have an idea...  Why not get a real job and stop being such a bottomfeeding scumbag? 

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to JohnWarren)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 6:43:47 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline
Ummm, the whole point is that it will set a precedent.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DiannaVesta

My only hope is that this will not set any precedence or begin opening new doors that will create a witch hunt. We’ve seen enough of those.  

(in reply to DiannaVesta)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 7:08:11 PM   
NickInSLC


Posts: 121
Joined: 8/9/2005
Status: offline
Did you actually take the time to look at her work before passing judgement Kenin?   Barbara Nitke's pictures are very artistic depictions of people participating in some of the most profound moments of their lives.

This might be hard for you to believe, but the entire BDSM community does not revolve around your spank and fuck mentality.  For some, this is a form of worship.  Barbarah Nitke made a sincere effort to depict that in a very artistic manner.  Her work is hardly smut.  Because you're unable to understand something makes it no less valid.

Just remember what side you stood for when they come to get you.  Today, it's the gays and the 'smut peddlers', tomorrow it'll be SM'ers and adulterers.

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 7:34:47 PM   
JohnWarren


Posts: 3807
Joined: 3/18/2005
From: Delray Beach, FL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DiannaVesta

This is really sad & I admire the stand she took, however the laws have clearly been posted and they are there for a reason.  

“The law requires that those sending obscene communications on the Internet take reasonable actions to keep it away from children, like requiring a credit card, debit account or adult access code as proof of age.”
 

 Exactly what “obscene communications” means, still is not clear, however publishing sexual images or video without any type of protection from minors is clearly defined.   It takes work and an act of responsibility. In my opinion it doesn’t matter if it’s conceived as art or other.

I know the boundaries are sensitive in the case of freedom; however as a mother I am glad the laws were in place.
  My only hope is that this will not set any precedence or begin opening new doors that will create a witch hunt. We’ve seen enough of those.  

Thank you John for posting this.

Dianna



I just checked out your website and the first image with exposed nipples and genitals meets the standards of "indecent" in the law.

Have fun!

_____________________________

www.lovingdominant.org

(in reply to DiannaVesta)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 8:15:01 PM   
TeeGO


Posts: 451
Joined: 12/11/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NickInSLC

Did you actually take the time to look at her work before passing judgement Kenin?   Barbara Nitke's pictures are very artistic depictions of people participating in some of the most profound moments of their lives.

This might be hard for you to believe, but the entire BDSM community does not revolve around your spank and fuck mentality.  For some, this is a form of worship.  Barbarah Nitke made a sincere effort to depict that in a very artistic manner.  Her work is hardly smut.  Because you're unable to understand something makes it no less valid.

Just remember what side you stood for when they come to get you.  Today, it's the gays and the 'smut peddlers', tomorrow it'll be SM'ers and adulterers.


Very well said.

(in reply to NickInSLC)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 8:17:11 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NickInSLC

Did you actually take the time to look at her work before passing judgement Kenin?   Barbara Nitke's pictures are very artistic depictions of people participating in some of the most profound moments of their lives.

This might be hard for you to believe, but the entire BDSM community does not revolve around your spank and fuck mentality.  For some, this is a form of worship.  Barbarah Nitke made a sincere effort to depict that in a very artistic manner.  Her work is hardly smut.  Because you're unable to understand something makes it no less valid.

Just remember what side you stood for when they come to get you.  Today, it's the gays and the 'smut peddlers', tomorrow it'll be SM'ers and adulterers.



If she was just taking up the fight to protect her own work I might actually take heed to your spunk.  Anybody that actually uses their head realizes that somebody who is representing an entire group of people and is fighting a Law that affects a HUGE number of people, not to mention being supported by many, many people financially and other, is not marching to the USSC to solely protect their own work.

That was a no brainer.

< Message edited by SirKenin -- 3/20/2006 8:19:12 PM >


_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to NickInSLC)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 8:32:36 PM   
NickInSLC


Posts: 121
Joined: 8/9/2005
Status: offline
Ummmm...  I fail to see your point.  She was in court over her own work, not the work of somebody else.  Yes, she was attempting to set a precedent that others could use.  But she wasn't in court over any pictures but her own.  She was supported by other people who realized that if such artistic work could be deemed obsene, then we've all lost a great deal of our freedom to express ourselves.
 
Do you not find it the slightest bit disconcerting that we live in a society that glorifies violence, yet villifies expessions of love?

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 8:53:40 PM   
thetammyjo


Posts: 6322
Joined: 9/8/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnWarren

I just received the following message from NCSF. Note that the Court ruled without even hearing oral arguments.

We may see more websites self censoring or even going out of business.




And this would be very sad.

We lose our freedoms and our rights when we roll over (or bent over) without a fight.

My website is being revamped and it will include a lot more erotic materials. I am not ashamed of what I do and feel no need to hide. Let them come for me, let them come, only but each of us being unashamed and standing up do any of us have a chance to be ourselves.

I believe that claims that anyone on this board is somehow different from those who make a living via kink is heading toward a slippery slope.

It reminds me of the words of Pastor Martin Niemoeller: “First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.”

Those who hide in their closets and side with those trying to end the civil rights of consenting adults had best make their closets very very very deep because eventually those in power who are attempting to control consenting adults and limit free speak will look for you as well. And then who will defend you who have joined in the attacks on others "more preverted" than you? No one will defend you because all of those unashamed and brave will have been cast out by you to the beasts of narrow-mindedness and the agents of socical control and you may not ever realize what is happening to your own freedoms until it is too late to reclaim them or to save yourselves.

That being said, I'm not convinced that a preemptive strike via the courts was the best approach -- the case was theorethical and I'm not sure that is the best way to test the law though it seems to be a common way to do so. Any lawyers have opinions on this concern?

_____________________________

Love, Peace, Hugs, Kisses, Whips & Chains,

TammyJo

Check out my website at http://www.thetammyjo.com Or www.tammyjoeckhart.com

And my LJ where I post fiction in progress if you "friend" me at http://thetammyjo.livejournal.com/

(in reply to JohnWarren)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 10:04:21 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NickInSLC
But she wasn't in court over any pictures but her own. 


Yes she was.  You are too narrow minded.  She used her work as the example, true.  If you are going to Court, you need to have a case to present, obviously.  But it was much broader than that.  It was not just her own work, but "art" in general.  The ruling spoke to that specifically, which is a very good indication of what the arguments were, or in the case of the USSC, would have been.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to NickInSLC)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 10:18:52 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline
Laughing...this from the walking paragon of open-mindedness.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin

You are too narrow minded.

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 10:35:47 PM   
TeeGO


Posts: 451
Joined: 12/11/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thetammyjo

It reminds me of the words of Pastor Martin Niemoeller: “First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.”

Thank you.

I was thinking of this exact quote myself.  Except I couldn't remember it exactly and I certainly couldn't remember who said it.

Damn, I love hanging out on this site with smart people.

(in reply to thetammyjo)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/20/2006 10:55:35 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

Laughing...this from the walking paragon of open-mindedness.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin

You are too narrow minded.

\

Just because I do not put up with your shit does not mean I am not open-minded..  You might be surprised if you actually approached Me in a decent manner for once.  There is an awful lot I put up with, tolerate, etc..   Unfortunately, however, people's crap is not included.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/21/2006 4:56:07 AM   
TheHungryTiger


Posts: 454
Joined: 3/9/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin

hmmm.  Oh well.  I have no sympathy for them at all.  If you want to peddle your smut, be prepared to pay the price.  Lining your pockets from the lowest common denominator in society is not protected, as has clearly been spoken to.  Like it or lump it is all I have to say.

You pays your money and you takes your choice.  I have an idea...  Why not get a real job and stop being such a bottomfeeding scumbag? 
ok, you do realise that the CDA was in several sections and that the part protaing to "peddling smut" was ruled unconstituninal in 'Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union' in 1997.

The Nitkie case didnt involve images that were for sale over the net. They involved immages that claimed to be "artistic".


_____________________________

Bondage Ropes
High quality center-marked
bondage ropes and supplies.
www.kinkyropes.com

Ads by Goooooogle

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/21/2006 4:57:21 AM   
JohnWarren


Posts: 3807
Joined: 3/18/2005
From: Delray Beach, FL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnWarren

I just checked out your website and the first image with exposed nipples and genitals meets the standards of "indecent" in the law.

Have fun!


Oops, I just noticed that the "first image" I was was the lead in from The Fetish Network.  It was the primary response from Google and I didn't look far enough.  The picture on Vesta's front page is less explicit but might make the indecent guideline.

That's part of the point, although.  By using "indecent" rather than "obscene" the net is thrown very widely in this law.

_____________________________

www.lovingdominant.org

(in reply to JohnWarren)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/21/2006 10:26:47 AM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHungryTiger

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin

hmmm.  Oh well.  I have no sympathy for them at all.  If you want to peddle your smut, be prepared to pay the price.  Lining your pockets from the lowest common denominator in society is not protected, as has clearly been spoken to.  Like it or lump it is all I have to say.

You pays your money and you takes your choice.  I have an idea...  Why not get a real job and stop being such a bottomfeeding scumbag? 
ok, you do realise that the CDA was in several sections and that the part protaing to "peddling smut" was ruled unconstituninal in 'Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union' in 1997.

The Nitkie case didnt involve images that were for sale over the net. They involved immages that claimed to be "artistic".



Are they not published on the net?  When I say peddling smut, I do not just mean selling it, although certainly that would be the major focus.  Other people peddle smut by giving it away for free, but leading to pay sites.  Some do it by filling their pages with ads.  Some do it with popups.  Others do it by installing spyware on your computer.  There are a dozen ways of peddling smut, without asking for a credit card number.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to TheHungryTiger)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/21/2006 2:37:04 PM   
artglfr


Posts: 235
Joined: 4/8/2005
Status: offline
It does tend to have a chilling effect on the community. I don't know anyone who would not be affected sooner or later by some of this decision. Just about all of us have some kind of "porn" on our computer at least in the Justice departments eyes.

(in reply to JohnWarren)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/28/2006 5:02:32 AM   
SirLordTrainer


Posts: 820
Joined: 5/6/2004
From: Indy
Status: offline
What a coincidence, I was just at her site after following the link on your webpage prior to seeing this thread and I couldnt find anything remotely obscene about it personally. Is that to say if I have a profile that has photos of say My ropework with a few subbies in compromisingly consensual positions, but is clearly identified as 'Adult' and requires an Adult sign-in to view, does that make Me a target. Is it just Me or is this country becoming more and more communistic.

(in reply to JohnWarren)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Barbara Nitke loses in USSC - 3/29/2006 10:15:27 AM   
Guilty1974


Posts: 467
Joined: 11/2/2005
From: Den Haag
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DiannaVesta

This is really sad & I admire the stand she took, however the laws have clearly been posted and they are there for a reason.  

“The law requires that those sending obscene communications on the Internet take reasonable actions to keep it away from children, like requiring a credit card, debit account or adult access code as proof of age.”
 



So that would basically mean that - were I a US resident - I would have to guard my totally free website (containing mostly pictures of my fully dressed but tied girlfriend) with expensive checks if my viewers are adults. Personally I find that rather silly. It is not I who should make sure that you're children don't enter my website. It is *you* who as a responsible mother should make sure they do not use the internet without parental guidance before they are old enough to choose which sites are appropriate and which not. Internet is not an electronic babysitter.

Roel

(in reply to DiannaVesta)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Alternative Lifestyles in the News >> Barbara Nitke loses in USSC Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.273