7 ms·

Thank you for posting this. EFF makes the site seem like purely a forum and it just wasn't - it doesn't change MY personal opinion of this matter (I am against

Thank you for posting this. EFF makes the site seem like purely a forum and it just wasn't - it doesn't change MY personal opinion of this matter (I am against the takedown STRONGLY) but it worries me when people with whom I agree seem to miss the mark on providing an accurate representation of the facts. I'm not suggesting it's intentionally misleading, but I think it doesn't get it exactly right.

chillingeffect 12y ago
I wish the EFF had stated the case as an issue of state's rights. From Wikipedia: The regulation of prostitution in the United States is not among the enumerated powers of the federal government. Under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, it is therefore exclusively the domain of the states to permit, prohibit, or otherwise regulate commercial sex, except insofar as Congress may regulate it as part of interstate commerce with laws like the Mann Act. Furthermore, that site is also legal in parts of Nevada where prostitution is legal. I don't see how the federal government has jurisdiction in this matter. The Mann act is for interstate commerce. Perhaps this applies, but I think a real lawyer could share their related experience. 10th Amendment, btw: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
- learc83 12y ago
  >Congress may regulate it as part of interstate commerce The website is pretty clearly operating across state lines. If the website is based in California (just made that up), runs on servers in Texas, and it allows users in Michigan to solicit sex from users in Florida, it's pretty clearly engaging in interstate commerce. Even if the website limited users to just one state, the federal government could still potentially regulate it under the interstate commerce clause provided the intrastate commerce substantially affects interstate commerce. -Note: the site by itself doesn't have to have a substantial effect. It just has to be part of a potential substantial cumulative effect--that is to say, hundreds of intrastate sex advertisement websites would, together, have a substantial cumulative effect on interstate commerce, so congress would be justified in banning all sex advertising websites, even if individually they don't engage in interstate commerce. Edit: This comment assumes that the website was in fact facilitating prostitution. This may or may not be the case, I have no idea.
  - davorak 12y ago
    > The website is pretty clearly operating across state lines. If the website is based in California (just made that up), runs on servers in Texas, and it allows users in Michigan to solicit sex from users in Florida, it's pretty clearly engaging in interstate commerce. A web site has to police the addresses of user base for user to user interactions? Are their examples where ebay, amazon, or similar service has to proactively police its user or suffer criminal charges for user to user interactions?
    - learc83 12y ago
      I'm not saying that at all, my comment was addressed at the parent commenter who said that the federal government couldn't regulate prostitution unless it was part of interstate commerce. Therefore, the assumption is that the website was engaged in facilitating prostitution. The website may not have been engaged in facilitating prostitution, I have no idea. There are likely plenty of arguments to be made here (the website is just a meeting place for users, it doesn't promote prostitution etc...)--that the federal government doesn't have the power to regulate a website facilitating prostitution is not one of them.
      - davorak 12y ago
        > and it allows users in Michigan to solicit sex from users in Florida, it's pretty clearly engaging in interstate commerce. The above is really where I got the impression you were talking mainly about user to user interaction. Forum software would allow for "users in Michigan to solicit sex from users in Florida" so the statement seemed too inclusive. Under the assumption they are facilitating what you said lines up with my understanding.
    - pjc50 12y ago
      ebay? Absolutely. Consider the list of things you can't sell on ebay. Anyone who runs a forum has to consider their liability for their users posting illegal content, from child porn down to less serious things.
      - 12y ago

chillingeffect 12y ago

I wish the EFF had stated the case as an issue of state's rights. From Wikipedia: The regulation of prostitution in the United States is not among the enumerated powers of the federal government. Under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, it is therefore exclusively the domain of the states to permit, prohibit, or otherwise regulate commercial sex, except insofar as Congress may regulate it as part of interstate commerce with laws like the Mann Act. Furthermore, that site is also legal in parts of Nevada where prostitution is legal. I don't see how the federal government has jurisdiction in this matter. The Mann act is for interstate commerce. Perhaps this applies, but I think a real lawyer could share their related experience. 10th Amendment, btw: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people

learc83 12y ago
>Congress may regulate it as part of interstate commerce The website is pretty clearly operating across state lines. If the website is based in California (just made that up), runs on servers in Texas, and it allows users in Michigan to solicit sex from users in Florida, it's pretty clearly engaging in interstate commerce. Even if the website limited users to just one state, the federal government could still potentially regulate it under the interstate commerce clause provided the intrastate commerce substantially affects interstate commerce. -Note: the site by itself doesn't have to have a substantial effect. It just has to be part of a potential substantial cumulative effect--that is to say, hundreds of intrastate sex advertisement websites would, together, have a substantial cumulative effect on interstate commerce, so congress would be justified in banning all sex advertising websites, even if individually they don't engage in interstate commerce. Edit: This comment assumes that the website was in fact facilitating prostitution. This may or may not be the case, I have no idea.
- davorak 12y ago
  > The website is pretty clearly operating across state lines. If the website is based in California (just made that up), runs on servers in Texas, and it allows users in Michigan to solicit sex from users in Florida, it's pretty clearly engaging in interstate commerce. A web site has to police the addresses of user base for user to user interactions? Are their examples where ebay, amazon, or similar service has to proactively police its user or suffer criminal charges for user to user interactions?
  - learc83 12y ago
    I'm not saying that at all, my comment was addressed at the parent commenter who said that the federal government couldn't regulate prostitution unless it was part of interstate commerce. Therefore, the assumption is that the website was engaged in facilitating prostitution. The website may not have been engaged in facilitating prostitution, I have no idea. There are likely plenty of arguments to be made here (the website is just a meeting place for users, it doesn't promote prostitution etc...)--that the federal government doesn't have the power to regulate a website facilitating prostitution is not one of them.
    - davorak 12y ago
      > and it allows users in Michigan to solicit sex from users in Florida, it's pretty clearly engaging in interstate commerce. The above is really where I got the impression you were talking mainly about user to user interaction. Forum software would allow for "users in Michigan to solicit sex from users in Florida" so the statement seemed too inclusive. Under the assumption they are facilitating what you said lines up with my understanding.
  - pjc50 12y ago
    ebay? Absolutely. Consider the list of things you can't sell on ebay. Anyone who runs a forum has to consider their liability for their users posting illegal content, from child porn down to less serious things.
    - 12y ago