3 ms·
My initial thought is that the kind of regulation being proposed here is going to be unconstitutional. In the United States, source code is protected as free s
by abtinf 10y ago
My initial thought is that the kind of regulation being proposed here is going to be unconstitutional.
In the United States, source code is protected as free speech. Limitations on free speech are subject to "strict scrutiny" which means a restriction "narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest." A compelling state interest is, per wikipedia, "something necessary or crucial, as opposed to something merely preferred. Examples include national security, preserving the lives of a large number of individuals, and not violating explicit constitutional protections." And the regulation must also be the least restrictive way of achieving the interest.
It is improper for the government to declare that certain types of speech, say, journalism, may occur in a geographic area but not other kinds, say, source code creation.
IANAL
Edit: wow, thats a whole lotta downvotes. I wonder why.
- Terr_ 10y ago> A compelling state interest is, per wikipedia, An interesting example that doesn't seem to match the issue of yelling free-speech through a megaphone at 3AM in a crowded apartment block. (It's not national-security, and the only life being preserved is probably your own.)
- blazespin 10y agoPalo Alto is one of the most desirable areas to live in ... why? It's because of smart zoning rules.
- apsec112 10y agoActually, the exact opposite. Central Palo Alto was built before World War II, when zoning codes were nonexistent, or much less strict. Most of Silicon Valley was built afterwards, when zoning mandated cookie-cutter suburbs, sterile office parks and acres of parking lots, and is much uglier.
- mahyarm 10y agoIt's more because of stanford, the jobs and the schools, which is about people and not zoning laws. There are plenty of places that are nicer to live and nicer looking than palo alto. And I've lived there for years.
- blazespin 10y agoThere's nowhere that is nicer than downtown palo alto.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> In the United States, source code is protected as free speech. That's unclear in the general sense. There have been some Circuit Court decisions that held something like that in at least some circumstances, and some criticism that the broader of those are in some tension with applicable Supreme Court precedent. AFAIK, the Supreme Court has never held that source code is speech in the broad sense. > Limitations on free speech are subject to "strict scrutiny" Incorrect. Content-based limitations on speech are subject to strict scrutiny, content-neutral limitations on speech are subject to intermediate scrutiny. Restriction of a particular medium of speech without regard to content would seem to be a content-neutral restriction.
- abtinf 10y agoThis is a complicated topic. Content-neutral restrictions can be subject to strict scrutiny. http://plannersweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2000/01/379.pdf http://plannersweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2000/01/379.pdf
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]