- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 2, 2006 at 2:07 am #685148
Anonymous
InactiveGuess that’s a good reason to choose the private option when registering a domain.
March 2, 2006 at 3:22 am #685152Anonymous
InactiveThis came in your regular mail?
Meaning they spent money on staff to looking up addresses, post letters etc. – in other words they spent money – to send you this warning, under the pretense of caring about children. And you don’t even live under their jurisdiction!
That really is upsetting to me. If they cared about children, they would be putting these resources into saving children who are involved in child pornography. Why the hell are they wasting time with online gambling and underaged kids – as long as there is a single child being abused and raped for the sick enjoyment of perverts, they should be focusing on that!
My daughter worked as the Abuse Representative for a large online hosting company which gives out free webhosting, and she would be subjected to some of this stuff when somebody sent in a complaint and the RCMP came in to view it (before it was deleted without a trace from the company computers!). The horrifying attrocities she described to me that she witnessed will haunt her (and me) for a lifetime. And this is a bigger problem than anybody wants to admit. Much bigger and a magnitude more damaging to society than a 14 year old gambling on his mother’s credit card could ever be.
What f^&%ed up priorities these morons in government have!
March 3, 2006 at 12:04 am #685257Anonymous
Inactivemy guess is that with the patriot act the state could easily get “proxied” address information from the domain registrar.
there is a simliar law in Utah, with more penatlies. I believe that a bunch of marketers and retailers have gone to federal court to have the laws blocked.
when governments start contacting you about your business practices, i would make sure i get myself the advice of a good lawyer.
BTW – these “protection” laws apply to opt-in emails too. Utah wants you to screen your database every month, for a fee, to comply.
March 3, 2006 at 1:00 am #685266Anonymous
InactiveAmCan wrote:BTW – these “protection” laws apply to opt-in emails too.Well that’s the most rediculous thing I’ve ever heard of. How the heck can I be certain that my double opt-in email subscriber is 18 years old and not 17?
How cam Match.com be assured that the girl posing as an adult isn’t 14?
How can Amazon.com rest assured that the fifteen books on sex education and hemp weren’t ordered by little Billy “borrowing” mommy’s credit card?
How can FriendFinder.com be assured that the next guy a woman meets hasn’t been arrested three times for rape?
It’s all so so stupid, and Uncle Sam has his fat ass parked in my backyard everytime I turn around. :dafingers
March 3, 2006 at 5:16 am #685273Anonymous
InactiveThe cowards in government are just taking aim at the easiest targets.
There’s no sincere attempt to protect children, it’s a ruse intended to garner votes from the moral right.
It’s bullshit.
-
AuthorPosts