Out-Law newsletter says IWF "was wrong to lift its ban on a Wikipedia page"

[Richard Clayton]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <22FD887444964E67BD75B08B8FBA1705@your41b8d18ede>, Tom
Thomson <cmt@btinternet.com> writes


>Now, if that photograph is pornographic (which is presumably to be
>interpreted as meaning indecent, 

no - they're different tests

>since the 1978 act refers to indecent
>photographs and pseudo-photographs and the 2003 act does not amend that)

It's intentional that PoCA (as amended) says "indecent" which is "lower
level" than "pornographic" (or "obscene")

- -- 
richard                                              Richard Clayton

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.         Benjamin Franklin

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1

iQA/AwUBSUU4VpoAxkTY1oPiEQIrHwCg8VbpjkcdXk/driV3mN/JlJ4tMM4AmweA
+7RZH9rJLnVehbqsF9PuIloi
=vRnP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----