3 ms·

Terms of Service are really out of control, and probably need a democratic checkup. One cannot sign away constitutional rights, which means somewhere there is

Terms of Service are really out of control, and probably need a democratic checkup. One cannot sign away constitutional rights, which means somewhere there is a line to draw. When is a company abusing it's first amendment rights and dangerously coercing behavior, a la "yelling fire in theater"? At scale, this doesn't have to be explicitly extreme or violent to have actual extreme or violent effects. When is it going too far against illegal search, by using technology that transcends physical, or psychic, boundaries? When, really, have they crossed over your right to privacy, by accurately inferring very personal and private details you didn't share, from details you did? I wonder what would happen if people flipped the script. Send Google a letter, stating your new ToS: "Your continued use of my data is $legalese, and if you don't reply with "no thanks", you agree to remit $dollars to me Monthly." If they don't respond, this is your new operating agreement.

darkpuma 8y ago
> "When is a company abusing it's first amendment rights and dangerously coercing behavior, a la "yelling fire in theater"?" I really wish people would stop using that example. That standard of free speech is obsolete, and it comes from an abhorrent case where a draft protestor during WWI was arrested for telling people to dodge the draft. "Yelling fire in a theater" was used to justify upholding his conviction. It's a deeply immoral standard of free speech.
- smnrchrds 8y ago
  > That standard of free speech is obsolete What is the modern example/standard?
  - darkpuma 8y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action
- angel_j 8y ago
  Fair editorial suggestion, no doubt. Will change to 'yelling "terrorists!" on a busy day at Disneyland'. H/e, that the example was used to uphold an immoral conviction does not make it an "immoral standard"; it makes the jury immoral people; "...fire!" is basically a metaphor at this point, an easy-to-abstract notion for when the first amendment will not defend you.
  - darkpuma 8y ago
    "Fire in a crowded theater" came from the SCOTUS justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., not a jury. "Yelling fire" in this case was a metaphor for "opposing the draft."

darkpuma 8y ago

> "When is a company abusing it's first amendment rights and dangerously coercing behavior, a la "yelling fire in theater"?" I really wish people would stop using that example. That standard of free speech is obsolete, and it comes from an abhorrent case where a draft protestor during WWI was arrested for telling people to dodge the draft. "Yelling fire in a theater" was used to justify upholding his conviction. It's a deeply immoral standard of free speech.

smnrchrds 8y ago
> That standard of free speech is obsolete What is the modern example/standard?
- darkpuma 8y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action
angel_j 8y ago
Fair editorial suggestion, no doubt. Will change to 'yelling "terrorists!" on a busy day at Disneyland'. H/e, that the example was used to uphold an immoral conviction does not make it an "immoral standard"; it makes the jury immoral people; "...fire!" is basically a metaphor at this point, an easy-to-abstract notion for when the first amendment will not defend you.
- darkpuma 8y ago
  "Fire in a crowded theater" came from the SCOTUS justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., not a jury. "Yelling fire" in this case was a metaphor for "opposing the draft."