3 ms·
>"We have not, to date, accepted that freedom of expression requires the facilitation of the unlawful sale of goods." That precise argument may be well-intenti
by mowenz 9y ago
>"We have not, to date, accepted that freedom of expression requires the facilitation of the unlawful sale of goods."
That precise argument may be well-intentioned, but it threatens free speech because it sets a precedent placing a burden of acceptable effects and results of free speech.
In other words, should Tiamen Square be de-indexed globally because free speech in China does not require it. Should torrent trackers be de-indexed--free speech does not require illegal file sharing, after all? What about bit torrent clients? Tor browser?
This site may or may not be rightfully de-indexed, but it is not because of some limitations of free speech.
- mrout 9y ago>In other words, should Tiamen Square be de-indexed globally because free speech in China does not require it. Should torrent trackers be de-indexed--free speech does not require illegal file sharing, after all? What about bit torrent clients? Tor browser? The Canadian courts are not saying 'you must remove these results', not really. They're saying 'you must remove these results or not operate in Canada', effectively. If China said 'hey google, remove Tianammen Sq from all of your results, not just China' Google could simply refuse to do so. If they did, they probably want to get the hell out of China. If a court somewhere ruled that torrent clients should be removed from all global search results, then it would be up to Google whether they want to continue operating in that jurisdiction. If they do, then they are subject to the laws of that jurisdiction. Should torrent trackers be de-indexed? Who cares? It's not about should. It's not about what is ideal. It's about what is and is not.