4 ms·

Does anyone have a breakdown from a lawyer about the RESTRICT act? I have no doubt that the bill is awful but all of the interpretation I have seen has been fro

Does anyone have a breakdown from a lawyer about the RESTRICT act? I have no doubt that the bill is awful but all of the interpretation I have seen has been from people without legal backgrounds and with (to me, also someone without a legal background) very shaky readings e.g. just using a VPN AT ALL will get you 20 years in prison.

wilsonnb3 4y ago
I recommend reading it yourself, it is not a very long bill. It is crystal clear about the penalties for bypassing any “mitigation measures” that the executive branch creates using the bill/law. So no, just using a VPN will not be illegal. Using a VPN (or anything else) to access software or services provided by a “foreign adversary” that are deemed illegal to use by the executive branch will be punishable criminally by a fine of up to $1,000,000 and 20 years in jail and civilly by a fine of not more than $250,000. VPN providers may also find themselves in hot water if an adventurous prosecutor wants to make a case that the VPN provider is “aiding and abetting” simply by providing a service that can be used to circumvent the law. I would also appreciate a lawyer weighing in on that particular part as I am sure there is a lot of legal precedent involved in determining what counts as “aiding and abetting” in this context.
- lazystar 4y ago
  > Using a VPN (or anything else) to access software or services provided by a “foreign adversary” maybe im missing something ...how is that not already illegal? as an example, if someone in ukraine used a vpn to access the kremlins internal networks, id assume they were a spy for russia. the terminology is vague, but at first glance stuff like the pirate bay doesnt appear to match.
  - vkou 4y ago
    > maybe im missing something ...how is that not already illegal? Why on Earth should visiting, say, a Russian news site, or logging into VKontakte from the United States, using a VPN be illegal?
    - lazystar 4y ago
      "provided by a foreign adversary" is quite a bit different than "provided by a citizen living in a region controlled by a foreign adversary". yes, a russian news site has a vested interest in supporting the russian govt, but its not the same as a web portal owned, operated, and advertised by a division of the russian govt. in other words, fox news's website is a lot different than the white house website.
      - vkou 4y ago
        > "provided by a foreign adversary" is quite a bit different than "provided by a citizen living in a region controlled by a foreign adversary". There's no meaningful difference. And even if there was one, public discourse in the United States makes it very clear that it doesn't see a meaningful distinction between the CCP and TikTok, between the Kremlin, and, say RT. It's utterly antithetical to everything western civilization stands for to imprison someone for reading. Even if what they are reading is foreign propaganda. It's shit straight out of the playbook of Stalin's[1] USSR[2]. And half this forum is arguing for it! This isn't a slow-boiling the frog moment, it's shoving us right into the incinerator. [1] Death to spies, wreckers, saboteurs and other counter-revolutionaries that oppose the freest country in the history of the world. [2] Even in Putin's Russia, you don't go to prison for reading American propaganda. This level of insecurity is baffling.
        lazystar 4y ago
        > It's utterly antithetical to everything western civilization stands for mccarthyism, the sedition act of 1918, and the espionage act of 1917 come to mind. whatever your understanding is of what western civilization stands for - and what you are arguing we are losing - are ideals that were created long after those previous acts came and went. my point is that a set of ideals will be at risk if it is too rigid - western civilization has succeeded in part due to its flexibility in difficult circumstances. in other words, it is better to have waxes and wanes to the freedoms available to a society, than to be rigid in a set of beliefs and watch the society be lost to history.
  - wongarsu 4y ago
    But appearing like a spy surely isn't illegal, is it? Being a spy is illegal, but because of the spying and stuff, not because you are in contract with people in Russia
- worrycue 4y ago
  > VPN providers may also find themselves in hot water if an adventurous prosecutor wants to make a case that the VPN provider is “aiding and abetting” simply by providing a service that can be used to circumvent the law. I'm not entirely sure how VPNs work but can't the providers just block access/refuse to connect to the IP addresses TikTok uses?
- enragedcacti 4y ago
  I have read it but I still have a number of questions, such as: 1. Which parts, if any, are on shaky constitutional grounds? How is our current supreme court likely to interpret it? 2. Does the bill allow arbitrary warrantless access to user data of covered entitites' platforms? 3. How broad is addition of foreign adversaries, both in terms of adding countries, and adding affiliates to those countries. Can US based companies be added because they manufacture in China? or operate in China?
- cultureswitch 4y ago
  If you read the DMCA bill you'll learn that building a PC (a device that can be used for copyright infringement) is a criminal offense. If there's one thing that the law as written seems consistently unable to deal with, it is anything that can be used for a variety of purposes, such as a VPN. Instead of specifying things clearly, the wording is so vague it becomes meaningless and everything important is up to the courts to actually figure out.

wilsonnb3 4y ago

I recommend reading it yourself, it is not a very long bill. It is crystal clear about the penalties for bypassing any “mitigation measures” that the executive branch creates using the bill/law. So no, just using a VPN will not be illegal. Using a VPN (or anything else) to access software or services provided by a “foreign adversary” that are deemed illegal to use by the executive branch will be punishable criminally by a fine of up to $1,000,000 and 20 years in jail and civilly by a fine of not more than $250,000. VPN providers may also find themselves in hot water if an adventurous prosecutor wants to make a case that the VPN provider is “aiding and abetting” simply by providing a service that can be used to circumvent the law. I would also appreciate a lawyer weighing in on that particular part as I am sure there is a lot of legal precedent involved in determining what counts as “aiding and abetting” in this context.

lazystar 4y ago
> Using a VPN (or anything else) to access software or services provided by a “foreign adversary” maybe im missing something ...how is that not already illegal? as an example, if someone in ukraine used a vpn to access the kremlins internal networks, id assume they were a spy for russia. the terminology is vague, but at first glance stuff like the pirate bay doesnt appear to match.
- vkou 4y ago
  > maybe im missing something ...how is that not already illegal? Why on Earth should visiting, say, a Russian news site, or logging into VKontakte from the United States, using a VPN be illegal?
  - lazystar 4y ago
    "provided by a foreign adversary" is quite a bit different than "provided by a citizen living in a region controlled by a foreign adversary". yes, a russian news site has a vested interest in supporting the russian govt, but its not the same as a web portal owned, operated, and advertised by a division of the russian govt. in other words, fox news's website is a lot different than the white house website.
    - vkou 4y ago
      > "provided by a foreign adversary" is quite a bit different than "provided by a citizen living in a region controlled by a foreign adversary". There's no meaningful difference. And even if there was one, public discourse in the United States makes it very clear that it doesn't see a meaningful distinction between the CCP and TikTok, between the Kremlin, and, say RT. It's utterly antithetical to everything western civilization stands for to imprison someone for reading. Even if what they are reading is foreign propaganda. It's shit straight out of the playbook of Stalin's[1] USSR[2]. And half this forum is arguing for it! This isn't a slow-boiling the frog moment, it's shoving us right into the incinerator. [1] Death to spies, wreckers, saboteurs and other counter-revolutionaries that oppose the freest country in the history of the world. [2] Even in Putin's Russia, you don't go to prison for reading American propaganda. This level of insecurity is baffling.
      - lazystar 4y ago
        > It's utterly antithetical to everything western civilization stands for mccarthyism, the sedition act of 1918, and the espionage act of 1917 come to mind. whatever your understanding is of what western civilization stands for - and what you are arguing we are losing - are ideals that were created long after those previous acts came and went. my point is that a set of ideals will be at risk if it is too rigid - western civilization has succeeded in part due to its flexibility in difficult circumstances. in other words, it is better to have waxes and wanes to the freedoms available to a society, than to be rigid in a set of beliefs and watch the society be lost to history.
- wongarsu 4y ago
  But appearing like a spy surely isn't illegal, is it? Being a spy is illegal, but because of the spying and stuff, not because you are in contract with people in Russia
worrycue 4y ago
> VPN providers may also find themselves in hot water if an adventurous prosecutor wants to make a case that the VPN provider is “aiding and abetting” simply by providing a service that can be used to circumvent the law. I'm not entirely sure how VPNs work but can't the providers just block access/refuse to connect to the IP addresses TikTok uses?
enragedcacti 4y ago
I have read it but I still have a number of questions, such as: 1. Which parts, if any, are on shaky constitutional grounds? How is our current supreme court likely to interpret it? 2. Does the bill allow arbitrary warrantless access to user data of covered entitites' platforms? 3. How broad is addition of foreign adversaries, both in terms of adding countries, and adding affiliates to those countries. Can US based companies be added because they manufacture in China? or operate in China?
cultureswitch 4y ago
If you read the DMCA bill you'll learn that building a PC (a device that can be used for copyright infringement) is a criminal offense. If there's one thing that the law as written seems consistently unable to deal with, it is anything that can be used for a variety of purposes, such as a VPN. Instead of specifying things clearly, the wording is so vague it becomes meaningless and everything important is up to the courts to actually figure out.