Important -- potential new legislation

[raj]

It appears that Sen. McCain wants to crack down on child porn, which is good, but that his legislation is flawed
http://news.com.com/SenatorIllegalimagesmustbereported/2100-1028_3-6142332.html?tag=nefd.lede

Couple of key paragraphs:
"After child pornography or some forms of "obscenity" are found and reported, the Web site must retain any "information relating to the facts or circumstances" of the incident for at least six months. Webmasters would be immune from civil and criminal liability if they followed the specified procedures exactly
. . .
Internet service providers already must follow those reporting requirements. But McCain's proposal is liable to be controversial because it levies the same regulatory scheme--and even stiffer penalties--on even individual bloggers who offer discussion areas on their Web sites."

It appears that even this site would be affected and required to follow detailed procedures for data retention.

[ulthar]

I'm too lazy today to read the legislation and try to interpret it, but why would legislation aimed at "Child Pornography" materially effect THIS site?

[raj]

Because if anyone were somehow to post such an image here, however briefly, then Andrew would have to do lots of record keeping for about six months. Rather than just logging the IP address and handing it over to the FBI.

[Andrew]

I long ago came to the realization that almost anything Sen McCain thinks is a good idea, I do not.

[trekgeezer]

This is another case in point that people doing the legislating don't understand anything about the internet.