On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 02:05:49PM -0500, Greg Shatan wrote:
Wouldn't it just be easier to say: "Domain names" are not included in the definition of "content" for purposes of this provision. ?
I'm not opposed to what you suggest. I think the previous argument was that in some cases they seem to be, because some people think that regulations on offensive strings and so on are in effect content regulations. I thought (though I confess my brain was a little addled) the way Becky put it was in line with what we said on the call; I'm just suggesting the little tweak. (In case it's going to cause a lot of trouble, this is certainly not my ditch and I hope today is not my day. I'm just pointing out that opening the door to names having a meaning is where the danger lies.) A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com