Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

["Wolfe, Joanna" <joanna.wolfe AT oup.com>]

Stream of [un]conciseness on this topic:
Why does a Mercedes need 3 screens?  If it has three screens, one
might suppose that the screens were designed for individual use.

So what goes on in the car, doesn't stay in the car.

What you do in the privacy of your own vehichle...?

I guess you could install shades, but you'd probably get pulled over
for driving with an obstructed view.

See, this is why you hire the limo with the driver and the tinted
windows.

Since the video screen is not supposed to be used by the driver, why
is the driver deemed responsible for the content being displayed on
the screen?

This is why the vehicles with the screens in the back of the seats and
the central armrest are better than those with the screen that drops
down from the roof.

What about busses?

What about handheld players? (no pun intended)

> ----------
> From:         Thomas Beckett
> Reply To:     Internetworkers:
> http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> Sent:         Thursday, October 28, 2004 9:36 AM
> To:   Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> Subject:      [internetworkers] drive-by porn?
> 
> Anyone been subjected to this?
> 
> -----------
> When the Car Beside You Is an XXX Theater
> By DAVID KIRBY
> 
> THE moment a phenomenon becomes a full-blown trend may be when it 
> acquires a nickname. The sightings of sexually explicit videos
> playing 
> on screens in cars have achieved that distinction with at least two 
> terms: dirty driving and drive-by porn.
> 
> On-board video has become widely popular with drivers, especially
> those 
> with children. But while many motorists entertain back-seat
> passengers 
> with DVD's like "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory," a
> surprising 
> number choose racier fare.
> 
> Andre Gainey, for example, was playing a pornographic video on three
> 
> screens in his Mercedes last February as he drove past a police
> station 
> in Schenectady, N.Y. Mr. Gainey, 35, was arrested and later
> convicted of 
> a misdemeanor charge of public display of sexual material and other 
> violations. Last August he was sentenced to three weekends in jail.
> 
> Few cars are equipped with as many screens as Mr. Gainey's. But 
> complaints from people who have spotted explicit images on screens 
> inside cars are growing nearly as fast as on-board DVD sales.
> 
> According to Wardsauto.com, an online trade publication, in the
> first 
> six months of 2004, 401,000 domestic vans, S.U.V.'s and light trucks
> 
> were produced with DVD video systems compared with 136,000 vehicles
> in 
> the same class for the entire year of 2002. This year, the Consumer 
> Electronics Association estimates that more than 110,000 systems
> will be 
> installed after a vehicle is bought.
> 
> Unscrupulous installers mount screens within view of the driver's
> seat, 
> even though 38 states have restrictions about placement of screens.
> 
> Passengers, however, are a different story. They can watch whatever
> they 
> want, can't they?
> 
> Not in some places. Sightings of adult videos by passengers -
> including 
> children - in other cars "is a vexing new phenomenon," said Jan
> LaRue, 
> chief counsel for Concerned Women for America, a conservative
> advocacy 
> group in Washington. Ms. LaRue, who wrote an essay titled
> "Four-Wheel 
> Indecency" for the group's Web site (cwfa.org), said new laws were 
> necessary as monitors inside cars had gotten bigger (up to 17
> inches, 
> measured diagonally) and more visible from outside.
> 
> "It's pretty incredible to have to write laws for people who lack
> the 
> common sense and civility to think it's O.K. to play such DVD's in
> full 
> view of other people, and especially children," Ms. LaRue said.
> 
> The police and judge in the Schenectady case did not need a special
> law 
> to prosecute Mr. Gainey. Nonetheless, measures to outlaw sexually 
> explicit videos in cars are growing.
> 
> Tennessee was the first state to pass such a law. A vehicular
> obscenity 
> bill, introduced in 2003 by State Representative W. C. Pleasant and 
> State Senator Mark Norris, both Republicans, became law this summer.
> 
> Under it, the display of sexually explicit material that can be
> viewed 
> from other cars is deemed not only morally unacceptable, but also a 
> driving hazard. "To avoid distracting other drivers and reduce the 
> likelihood of accidents arising from lack of concentration," the
> bill 
> states, "no obscene and patently offensive material, motion picture,
> 
> film, movie, videotape, DVD or other pictorial representation shall
> be 
> exhibited on a television, monitor or other viewing screen visible
> to 
> other drivers."
> 
> Fines for violating the law range from $2 to $50. "We're trying to
> take 
> a measured response to what is becoming a growing problem, as
> ridiculous 
> as it seems," said Mr. Norris, who received his first complaint from
> a 
> constituent last year.
> 
> "I wasn't aware of the extent to which it was becoming a problem,"
> he 
> said. "But I found a number of folks who were in their cars with 
> children, being held hostage to this kind of display at traffic
> lights. 
> Even pedestrians reported the experience."
> 
> Since then, several more reports of so-called drive-by porn have
> come to 
> his attention, Mr. Norris said. One Nashville radio host found
> herself 
> trapped between two cars, each displaying explicit videos. "She was 
> wedged in," he said. "She couldn't avoid it."
> 
> Who decides what is morally unacceptable? That, experts say, depends
> on 
> where you live. "Laws vary state by state and even by local
> ordinances," 
> said Barry Steinhardt, the director of the technology and liberty 
> program at the American Civil Liberties Union in New York.
> 
> Over the summer, Louisiana passed a law with decidedly sharper
> teeth. 
> Motorists convicted of playing pornographic videos on a screen that
> is 
> visible from outside their vehicle face fines up to $500 or six
> months 
> in jail or both. Repeat offenders face fines up to $1,000 or a
> year's 
> imprisonment or both.
> 
> State Representative Mickey James Guillory, a Republican, first
> heard 
> about the issue in early April, when a constituent complained about 
> being stuck at a stoplight next to a car playing an explicit video
> on a 
> visible screen.
> 
> Another bill, proposed in Oklahoma, died last May in conference 
> committee, but "might be reintroduced next year," said State 
> Representative Joe Dorman, a Democrat, who sponsored the measure.
> 
> "I witnessed it myself," Mr. Dorman said. "I was at a stoplight and
> the 
> car next to me had two DVD players. The same clip from a porn movie
> kept 
> playing over and over."
> 
> The three bills faced little opposition in their respective
> statehouses, 
> though First Amendment concerns were raised by local newspapers,
> civil 
> libertarians and the movie industry.
> 
> "Law enforcement officials have enough things to worry about," read
> an 
> editorial last April in The Leaf-Chronicle in Clarksville, Tenn.
> "Maybe 
> one day a child will catch a quick and blurry glimpse of a nudie
> movie 
> being played in someone else's car. It won't be a big deal if his 
> parents don't make it into one."
> 
> In Tennessee, state representatives of the A.C.L.U. and the Motion 
> Picture Association of America successfully pushed to modify that 
> state's bill from banning obscene "or" offensive material to banning
> 
> obscene "and" offensive material. The term "offensive," the
> association 
> argued, was too vague.
> 
> In-car videos also raise the question of safety. According to the 
> Louisiana State Police, at least two fatal accidents reported this
> year 
> were caused by drivers who were watching pornographic movies.
> 
> Regardless of the legal status of video in vehicles, there seems
> little 
> question that an explicit movie can be more distracting than a
> sighting 
> of, say, "Shrek 2."
> 
> "It really makes you do a double take," Mr. Norris said. "It gives
> the 
> term tailgating a whole new meaning."
> 
> Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/27/automobiles/27KIRB.html?oref=login
> ---
> Come and play at the InterNetWorkers Web site!
> http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> You are currently subscribed to InterNetWorkers mailing list
> To unsubscribe visit
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/internetworkers
> 
> An email has been sent to you using your old OUP-USA.ORG address.
> Please reply to this message and give them your OUP.COM address to
> use.
> 
> 
>