3 ms·
"Free speech" is all about the government not persecuting an individual for something they say. It offers no protection in a case like this between two non-gov
by SteveNuts 3y ago
"Free speech" is all about the government not persecuting an individual for something they say.
It offers no protection in a case like this between two non-government entities.
- charcircuit 3y agoYou are talking about the US's first ammendment. That doesn't exist in the EU.
- lxgr 3y agoTrue, but they raise a valid point in that even in the US, the government has no standing to intervene with private individuals limiting each others' speech contractually. NDAs are very much enforceable in the US.
- Jensson 3y ago> even in the US, the government has no standing to intervene with private individuals limiting each others' speech In Europe the government does that though, so "even in the US" is a nonsense argument here, the US is horrible at protecting individuals rights against oppressive companies. I am not certain about such laws that could apply to this case, but there are already plenty of laws around what you are allowed to retaliate for etc. Just like USA makes it illegal to fire based on race or to fire union organizers, it is the same principle.
- SteveNuts 3y ago>You are talking about the US's first ammendment. Then the "freedom of speech" argument is even more irrelevant, in my mind.
- Jensson 3y agoCompanies can't fire you for unrelated speech in most of Europe, their laws doesn't protect you as much from governments but they protect speech significantly more against private corporations. So just because US freedom of speech is limited to government doesn't mean that applies everywhere.
- SteveNuts 3y agoI still don't see how that is relevant at all between Apple and Epic...
- Jensson 3y agoThis is Apple retaliating for Epic criticizing them. You aren't allowed to do that without a more reasonable cause, Apple argues that it isn't illegal retaliation since they have reason to suspect Epic will breach contract, so it isn't entirely clear. But it is clear that free speech is highly relevant to this case and the courts will decide if you are allowed to retaliate for this kind of speech or not.
- hnfong 3y agoThe point is that EU employment law (whether somebody can be fired upon saying things) isn't relevant to a dispute between two business entities that are not in an employer/employee relationship...
- rvense 3y agoI don't think it applies in this case for the exact reasons stated, but the EU does indeed have a charter on fundamental rights that covers freedom of expression, among other things. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_of_Fundamental_Rights_of_the_European_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_of_Fundamental_Rights_...