> it seems slightly surprising to claim that a Chinese company has the full benefit of first amendment protections The first amendment isn't a law that says "t

> it seems slightly surprising to claim that a Chinese company has the full benefit of first amendment protections The first amendment isn't a law that says "these people have freedom of speech". Instead the law is written such that it's a restriction placed upon the legislature. "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech..." It doesn't indicate whose freedom of speech cannot be abridged by congress, so (barring any overriding jurisprudence or "original intent" I'm unaware of), this therefor apparently refers to the freedom of speech of everyone... everywhere. (I feel compelled to point out that I do not have a law degree of any kind) Later amendments draw a clearer and more deliberate distinction between who the law is targeted at. For example, in the 14th Amendment, it states in the first clause: "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." It's still a law designed to restrict the power of government. However, "any person" is a clearly and deliberately defined category of people that's different from "citizens of the United States" (a phrase which was used in the same section). It's therefor clear that this protection is meant to cover non-citizens as well.