logoalt Hacker News

senshanyesterday at 11:32 PM2 repliesview on HN

Good point, but judge's reduction it to a book equivalence is misleading and weakens the judgement.

Porn may provide a suitable model: not all movies need age verification, so those can be viewed at any age. Some movies, however, do require age verification. Similar age ratings could be applied to apps. For example, Facebook only after 18 regardless of parent's approval.


Replies

shkkmotoday at 12:10 AM

> judge's reduction it to a book equivalence is misleading and weakens the judgement

Good thing that isn't what happened. It is called an "analogy" and is not a factual statement of equivalence.

ls612yesterday at 11:36 PM

Porn has always been treated differently than other speech that is why most age verification laws want for it first. As for your other examples those are all technically voluntary, as it’s unlikely a government mandate that nobody under 17 can watch an R rated movie would pass constitutional muster. Parents can restrict what speech their kids say or hear but the government generally cannot in the US.

show 1 reply