4 ms·
> The First Amendment protects both GitHub’s right to host that code, and Professor Green’s right to publish (here republish) it on GitHub so he and others can
by atoav 4y ago
> The First Amendment protects both GitHub’s right to host that code, and Professor Green’s right to publish (here republish) it on GitHub so he and others can use it for teaching, for further study, and for development of the technology.
Yeah it proyects it against the government. Everybody else is still free to sue, take down, deny access, whatever.
- celticninja 4y agoBut who wants to do that other than the government? And it was removed directly because of government sanctions. I understand that the first ammendment is poorly understood with regard to private companies and hosting content online, but in this case the first ammendment is applicable.
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
- londons_explore 4y agoDoes the first amendment protect against treaties the US has signed with other countries requiring the government to take action or violate the treaty?
- pelorat 4y agoDepends on who you ask. The general feeling in Europe is that treaties signed by the USA (or Russia, China and many more) are basically worthless. I mean, when does USA ever ratify treaties into (federal) law, or into the constitution for that matter? Republicans would say "hell no it's our sovereignty", Democrats "maybe", the American courts: "maybe but probably not"
- chrisoverzero 4y ago> […] when does USA ever ratify treaties into (federal) law […] Never. Or immediately, depending on your perspective. Either way, there’s no need for further paperwork. > Treaties to which the United States is a party also have the force of federal legislation […] — https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/treaties.htm https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/treaties.htm
- soufron 4y agoWell, it could be seen as accessory to many sort of frauds. But to what extent would that be more accessory than using a car for example - and looking for the car manufacturer responsability?
- tumetab1 4y agoAFAIK the code was taken down in response to a government request, so this was a clear First Amedment violation.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- koheripbal 4y agoBy that interpretation, any takedown under sanctions law would be considered a first amendment violation. Which I believe the courts have already rejected.
- Drakim 4y agoIf the government doesn't like your criticism of their policies, can they simply sanction you to disable your free speech? Where does the line go?
- Gordonjcp 4y agoSo host it in a different country?
- koheripbal 4y agoSanctions compel everyone to take sanctioned content down - not only the gov't.