> Instead of shutting this down, Amazon could have let Signal continue. In fact, all companies should collaborate to make censorship as expensive as possible.

> Instead of shutting this down, Amazon could have let Signal continue. In fact, all companies should collaborate to make censorship as expensive as possible. Amazon's general stance seems to be "spoofing is bad and makes the internet less reliable, so we're opposing it even here". It's understandable, but I think also thoroughly unjustified. If the objection is "Signal plans to impersonate us without our permission for a good cause", one obvious response is "so let's give them permission". (Not coincidentally, this is a reasonable alternative to a lot of corporate heavy-handedness. Fighting trademark erosion by slapping down small businesses falls into much the same category - an alternative to coercing harmless-but-unauthorized users is to authorize them.)