Sie sind auf Seite 1von 3

INTERNET & OBSCENITY Indecency, vulgarity, obscenity- these are strictly confined to man; he invented them.

Among the higher animals there is no trace of them.1 But Beginning with the early research in packet switching, man also invented exciting new technology called internet 2and like others it also has its dark sides. Pornography, the darkest side, over internet is the biggest challenge faced by mankind today, because internet gives absolute communication & absolute isolation.3 Pornography is a form of discrimination on the basis of sex.4 It is the sexually explicit subordination of women, graphically depicted, whether in pictures or in words, that also includes one or more of the following: women are presented dehumanized as sexual objects, things or commodities; or women are presented as sexual objects who enjoy pain or humiliation; or women are presented as sexual objects who experience sexual pleasure in being raped; or women are presented as sexual objects tied up or cut up or mutilated or bruised or physically hurt; or women are presented in postures of sexual submission; or women's body partsincluding but not limited to vaginas, breasts, and buttocksare exhibited, such that women are reduced to those parts; or women are presented as whores by nature; or women are presented being penetrated by objects or animals; or women are presented in scenarios of degradation, injury, abasement, torture, shown as filthy or inferior, bleeding, bruised, or hurt in a context that makes these conditions sexual, the use of men, children, or transsexuals in the place of women in above is also pornography.5 In Indian context we dont find any Meese commission report6 so how we can look at the pornography, its effects and what we can do for safeguarding in case we find anything negative.

Earlier delivering news had been difficult & took a lot of time even when in the same country, with the advent of internet any news can be delivered just by a click of the mouse in a few seconds to a few minutes7 all over world. The concept of obscenity is relative. Obscenity has been discussed & test for obscenity has been laid down by several countries depending on the

1 2

Mark Twain et al,Mark Twain's Book of Animals, (ed.2010) ,p.119, University Of California Press. http://www.internetsociety.org/internet/internet-51/history-internet/brief-history-internet accessed on 4 Nov,2012 3 L. D. Sanders, Discovering Research Methods in Psychology: A Student's Guide, (ed.2009), p.146,Wileyblackwell 4 Catharine A. MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin , In harm's way : the pornography civil rights hearings, 1998, p.428 Harvard University Press. 5 Minneapolis: Memo on Proposed Ordinance on Pornography by Catharine A. MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin, Dec. 26,1983 6 The final report of the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography (usually referred to as The Meese Report, for U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese) is the result of a comprehensive investigation in to pornography ordered by U.S. President Ronald Reagan. It was published in July 1986 and contains 1,960 pages. 7 http://www.legalindia.in/obscenity-in-the-media ,accessed on 4Nov,2012

moral principles, decency codes & social structure of that particular country. 8 In case of internet Justice Harlan referred to it as "the intractable obscenity problem."9 Now we need to know what we can be considered obscene over internet English Law The test to determine obscenity under English law has been coined quite sometimes back in R vs Hicklin10 case. This is one of the earliest cases where the test for obscenity has been laid down. This case revolved around Henry Scott who resold copies of anti Christ pamphlets entitled The Confessional Unmasked: shewing the depravity of the Romish priesthood, the iniquity of the Confessional, and the questions put to females in confession. When the pamphlets were ordered to destroy as obscene, Scott appealed the order to the court of Quarter Sessions. Benjamin Hicklin, a London magistrate who was in charge of such orders as Recorder, revoked the order of destruction. Hicklin held that Scotts purpose had not been to corrupt public morals but to expose problems within the Catholic Church; hence, Scotts intention was innocent. The authorities appealed Hicklins reversal, bringing the case to the consideration of the Court of Queens Bench. In the Queens Bench it was held that the order of the justices were right as the publication of such an obscene pamphlet was a misdemeanor, and was not justified or excused by the appellants innocent motives or object; he must be taken to have intended the natural consequences of his act. The modern English law on obscenity began with Obscene Publications Act which came into force in 1959. On 1 September 2001, Sections 46 and 47 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act, U.K. came into force, making it an offence to place advertisements relating to prostitution in, or in the immediate vicinity of, a public telephone box. USA Law Under the U.S. law, For something to be considered "obscene," the Supreme Court uses what is known as "The Miller Test." Developed in 1973 in the case Miller v. California,11 the Supreme Court determined that the following types of works are not protected by the First Amendment and, therefore, can be prohibited. If the average person finds that when viewed as a whole, a work:

Appeals to the "prurient" interest (i.e., an unhealthy and degrading interest in sex) Depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and
8 9

Ibid. Interstate Circuit, Inc v Dallas, 390 U S 676, 704 (1968) (Harlan, J dissenting) 10 The test was named for the case Regina v Hicklin, L R 3 Q B 360 (1868)
11

Lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. All three parts of the Miller Test must be met before a material can be found to be obscene under the law. If just one of the parts is not met, the material would not be considered obscene under law and, in turn, would be constitutionally protected under the First Amendment. The most controversial portion of the test is the question of creative or scientific value. Even though some pornography may appeal to an average person's prurient interest and depict sexual conduct in an offensive way, if some contend it holds an artistic or literary value, it fails the Miller Test and is not deemed obscene. The geographic area of the Internet, however, is nonexistent, and geographic boundaries are essential to the "community" definition for the Supreme Court's Miller Test.12

India Law Sec 292(1) Of the Indian Penal Code defines obscenity as:

For the purpose of sub section (2), a book , pamphlet, paper writing , drawing, painting, representation , figure or any other object , shall be deemed to be obscene if it is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect , or (where it comprises) two or more distinct items) the effect of any of its items , is if taken as a whole , such as to tend to deparave & corrupt persons who are likely , having regard to all relevant circumstances , to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied.13
The test for judging a work should be that of an ordinary man of common sense & prudence & not an out of the ordinary or hypersensitive man. Hidayatullah C.J observed in the case of K.A.Abbas, If the depraved begins to see in these things more than what an average person would , in much the same way, as it is wrongly said a Frenchman sees a womans legs in everything, it cannot be helped. In the case of K.A.Abbas vs Union of India 14 the petitioner prepared a documentary film titled , A tale of Four cities, wherein he tried to depict the contrast between the lives of rich & poor in four major cities of India. Some parts of his documentary contained scenes from red light area of Bombay. The petitioner asked for a U certificate but the censor board turned down & he was granted a certificate restricted only for adults.

12 13

http://www.legalzoom.com/us-law/freedom-speech/how-is-obscenity-regulated Section 292(1),IPC1860 14 K. A. Abbas vs The Union Of India & Anr, 1971 AIR 481 1971 SCR (2) 446

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen