4 ms·

Could they say if they were?

stephenr 8y ago
If they were, and couldn't say so, it's unlikely they would specifically say they aren't, they would say nothing about it.
eridius 8y ago
No. But gag orders do not require the recipient to lie about it. Someone who is under a gag order simply doesn't comment one way or the other about it. FWIW this is the principle behind warrant canaries. A warrant canary is the practice of putting a statement such as "we have not received any NSLs" in a regular report, and then omitting it once you have received an NSL. Because you've conditioned people to expect its presence, its absence then serves as a signal that you likely have received one (though not proof, as there are other reasons you may have removed it, such as being advised by your lawyer that it's a bad idea as the courts may not look favorably on the idea that, no, you weren't actually violating your gag order, you were technically saying nothing, given that you set up the conditions yourself such that saying nothing is in fact saying something).
- kpil 8y ago
  I'm pretty sure that this strategy won't hold up in court. If you have a sign that indicates that a secret event have not happened, the intent of removing the sign is to indicate that the secret event did happen. The intent is particularly obvious to the originator of the secret event, so you won't be able to argue in the court that it was entirely coincidental.
  - iambateman 8y ago
    I agree. Could you have a canary community that calls companies once/quarter and specifically asks the NSL question? Seems safer for the companies themselves.
    - astrange 8y ago
      The legal system doesn't appreciate cleverness and you get negative points for trying. Either everything would work or nothing will.
  - astrange 8y ago
    Warrant canaries have reasonable precedent in the US because of the First Amendment. See New York Times Co. v. United States. This isn't true and they probably don't work in any other country in the world. They're explicitly illegal in Australia, apparently.
  - joesb 8y ago
    On the other hand, if I actually have a sign indicates that some secret event have not happened, how can I remove that sign if I truely believe I don't wanna keep telling the world that it have not happened? If I remove the sign just because I no longer want to keep the sign up and someone takes it to mean that the secret event did happen, when it really didn't happen, do they have ground to sue me for fraud or lying?
- derefr 8y ago
  What happens when you're legally obligated to comment? Like, if you receive an NSL about something, and then later are subpoenaed/compelled to testify before a grand jury or judicial inquest about that same thing? Neither grand juries nor coroners "outrank" the Executive (unlike Congress, who I would assume can just throw out the NSL to get testimony, since they have similar powers, like throwing out a document's top-secret classified status to get it read into the public record.) But in both situations, you can still be found in contempt of court if you just say "no comment."

If they were, and couldn't say so, it's unlikely they would specifically say they aren't, they would say nothing about it.

eridius 8y ago

No. But gag orders do not require the recipient to lie about it. Someone who is under a gag order simply doesn't comment one way or the other about it. FWIW this is the principle behind warrant canaries. A warrant canary is the practice of putting a statement such as "we have not received any NSLs" in a regular report, and then omitting it once you have received an NSL. Because you've conditioned people to expect its presence, its absence then serves as a signal that you likely have received one (though not proof, as there are other reasons you may have removed it, such as being advised by your lawyer that it's a bad idea as the courts may not look favorably on the idea that, no, you weren't actually violating your gag order, you were technically saying nothing, given that you set up the conditions yourself such that saying nothing is in fact saying something).

kpil 8y ago
I'm pretty sure that this strategy won't hold up in court. If you have a sign that indicates that a secret event have not happened, the intent of removing the sign is to indicate that the secret event did happen. The intent is particularly obvious to the originator of the secret event, so you won't be able to argue in the court that it was entirely coincidental.
- iambateman 8y ago
  I agree. Could you have a canary community that calls companies once/quarter and specifically asks the NSL question? Seems safer for the companies themselves.
  - astrange 8y ago
    The legal system doesn't appreciate cleverness and you get negative points for trying. Either everything would work or nothing will.
- astrange 8y ago
  Warrant canaries have reasonable precedent in the US because of the First Amendment. See New York Times Co. v. United States. This isn't true and they probably don't work in any other country in the world. They're explicitly illegal in Australia, apparently.
- joesb 8y ago
  On the other hand, if I actually have a sign indicates that some secret event have not happened, how can I remove that sign if I truely believe I don't wanna keep telling the world that it have not happened? If I remove the sign just because I no longer want to keep the sign up and someone takes it to mean that the secret event did happen, when it really didn't happen, do they have ground to sue me for fraud or lying?
derefr 8y ago
What happens when you're legally obligated to comment? Like, if you receive an NSL about something, and then later are subpoenaed/compelled to testify before a grand jury or judicial inquest about that same thing? Neither grand juries nor coroners "outrank" the Executive (unlike Congress, who I would assume can just throw out the NSL to get testimony, since they have similar powers, like throwing out a document's top-secret classified status to get it read into the public record.) But in both situations, you can still be found in contempt of court if you just say "no comment."