PC postage and the 1st Amendment

[Andrew_Bird]

It appears that you make your own official US Stamps that include a picture of your choice. This is done by using a program called PC postage.

Stamps.com has the following restrictions listed (see below) which appear to be extremely vague. If they are part of a government regulation I would assume they would be void for vagueness (what does otherwise objectionable mean?). Some of them even appear to cross the line being outright unconstitutional. Now, I assume that Stamps.com is a private company. But they also appear to the exclusive way to make photo stamps through the lincesing of PC postage. It appears that the Post Office is getting around the 1st Amendment by licensing.

Is this set up a violation of the 1st amendment?

3. Content Restrictions for Custom Goods

You agree not to use the website or service:

A. To upload, order for print, or otherwise transmit or communicate any material for any unlawful purpose or that is obscene, offensive, blasphemous, pornographic, sexually suggestive, deceptive, threatening, menacing, abusive, harmful, an invasion of privacy, supportive of unlawful action, defamatory, libelous, vulgar, violent, or otherwise objectionable;
B. To upload, order for print, or otherwise transmit or communicate any material that depicts celebrities or celebrity likenesses, regional, national or international leaders or politicians, current or former world leaders, convicted criminals, newsworthy, notorious or infamous images and individuals, or any material that is vintage in appearance or depicts images from an older era;
C. To upload, order for print, or otherwise transmit or communicate any material that you do not have a right to transmit or communicate under any contractual or fiduciary relationship or which infringes any copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right or any moral right of any party;
D. To upload or otherwise transmit any material which is likely to cause harm to any Stamps.com service or anyone else’s computer systems, including but not limited to that which contains any virus, code, worm, data or other files or programs designed to damage or allow unauthorized access to any Stamps.com service or which may cause any defect, error, malfunction or corruption to the service; and
E. To upload, order for print, or otherwise transmit or communicate any material that emulates any form of valid indicia or payment for postage.

You agree that if Stamps.com, in its sole discretion, determines that any material you upload may not meet these content requirements, Stamps.com may reject your order without explanation. Stamps.com reserves the right to charge a processing fee of $10.00 for each image, graphic or photograph that you submit as an order which violates our content restrictions.

In addition, in the event you violate these Content Restrictions and you intentionally publicize such violation, you acknowledge that Stamps.com will suffer substantial damage to its reputation and goodwill and that you can be liable for causing such substantial damage.

http://www.usps.com/onlinepostage/welcome.htm?from=home&page=onlinepostage
http://photo.stamps.com/Store/?source=si10985886

[Andrew_Bird]

It appears that there are three vendors. I don’t know if they all require the restrictions, but the law changed to allow ads in the stamps. I am trying to find there are content restrictions in the law.

http://www.dmnews.com/cms/dm-sectors/financial/36737.html

[smiling_bandit]

The government may not bar you from speaking. It is not generally obligated to help you speak.

[TimeWinder]

IANAL, but I don’t think so. They’re basically publishing something, and claiming editorial ability, which is clearly legit.

The government isn’t preventing you from using the government-provided part of the service (i.e. delivery of mail in return for payment of postage): you can get stamps at any post office. So it’s just the value-add portion of being able to create your own that’s in question here, and the government isn’t offering that.

Even if it were, stamps are publicly visible; and are therefore likely subject to the same sort of requirements as signs so far as decency goes. Most of the rest of those limits are just basic copyright and model-release types of limits, which are already controlled by law.

[stuyguy]

@TimeWinder

IANAL, but I don’t think so. They’re basically publishing something, and claiming editorial ability, which is clearly legit.

The government isn’t preventing you from using the government-provided part of the service (i.e. delivery of mail in return for payment of postage): you can get stamps at any post office. So it’s just the value-add portion of being able to create your own that’s in question here, and the government isn’t offering that.

Even if it were, stamps are publicly visible; and are therefore likely subject to the same sort of requirements as signs so far as decency goes. Most of the rest of those limits are just basic copyright and model-release types of limits, which are already controlled by law.

IANAL either, but there was a First Amendment case a number of years ago brought by a guy (or firm) who wanted to buy the adspace of the (now defunct) giant interior billboard in Grand Central Station here in NYC. He was refused the space because the ad conent was deemed unsuitable (obscene, or whatever). I’m pretty sure the court ruled in the guy’s favor.