翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ Nitipong Selanon ・ Nitipoom Navaratna ・ Nitish ・ Nitish Bharadwaj ・ Nitish Katara murder case ・ Nitish Kumar ・ Nitish Kumar (cricketer) ・ Nitish Mishra ・ Nitish Naik ・ Nitish Rana ・ Nitish Roy ・ Nitish Sengupta ・ Nitisinone ・ Nitisol ・ Nitix ・ Nitke v. Gonzales ・ Nitki ・ Nitkie ・ Nitmiluk National Park ・ Nitnem ・ Nito ・ Nito Alves ・ Nito Mestre ・ Nitobe Bunka College ・ Nitobe Inazō ・ Nitobe Memorial Garden ・ Nitobeia ・ Nitocrella ・ Nitocris ・ Nitocris (band) Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク Nitke v. Gonzales ： ウィキペディア英語版 Nitke v. Gonzales ''Nitke v. Gonzalez'', 413 F.Supp.2d 262 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) was a United States District Court for the Southern District of New York case regarding obscene materials published online. The plaintiff challenged the constitutionality of the obscenity provision of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). She claimed that it was overbroad when applied in the context of the Internet because certain contents deemed lawful in some communities and unlawful in others will be restricted due to the open access of the Internet. The plaintiff also sought a permanent injunction against the enforcement of the obscenity provision of the CDA. The court concluded that insufficient evidence was presented to show there was substantial variation in community standards, as applied in the "Miller test", and to show how much protected speech would actually be impaired because of these differences. The relief sought was denied, and the court ruled for the defendant. The Supreme Court subsequently affirmed this ruling without comment. ==Background== Nitke had published images on her website that were a means of ''alternative sexual expression'': adults performing various sexual activities. Previously, in Reno v. ACLU, the Supreme Court had ruled that the indecent speech provision in the CDA was overbroad and that it unnecessarily impaired protected speech.〔''Reno v. ACLU'', (521 U.S. 844 (1997) )〕 Barbara Nitke and the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, which advocates for people who practice non-traditional sexual practices, sought a similar ruling against the "obscene speech" provisions of the CDA and injunctive relief against future application of those sections of the CDA, arguing that the differences in community standards of what is considered "obscene speech" would have a "chilling effect" on any content on the Internet. Alberto Gonzales was the Attorney General of the United States at the time, making him the named defendant in this case.〔''United States Department of Justice'', (Office of the Attorney General ) (2009).〕 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「Nitke v. Gonzales」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.