|
''Memoirs v. Massachusetts'', , was the United States Supreme Court decision that attempted to clarify a holding regarding obscenity made a decade earlier in ''Roth v. United States'' (1957). Since the ''Roth'' ruling, to be declared obscene a work of literature had to be proven by censors to: 1) appeal to prurient interest, 2) be patently offensive, and 3) have no redeeming social value. The book in question in this case was ''Fanny Hill'' (or ''Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure'', 1749) by John Cleland and the Court held in ''Memoirs v. Massachusetts'' that, while it might fit the first two criteria (it appealed to prurient interest and was patently offensive), it could not be proven that ''Fanny Hill'' had no redeeming social value. The judgment favoring the plaintiff continued that it could still be held obscene under certain circumstances — for instance, if it were marketed solely for its prurient appeal. ''Memoirs v. Massachusetts'' led to more years of debate about what was and was not obscene and the conferring of more power in these matters to proposers of local community standards. == See also == * Banned in Boston * List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 383 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Memoirs v. Massachusetts」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|