3 ms·
> Republishing altered documents is illegal what exactly does this mean? misrepresenting the altered document as unaltered? i cant imagine it being illegal to
by 8note 10mo ago
> Republishing altered documents is illegal
what exactly does this mean? misrepresenting the altered document as unaltered?
i cant imagine it being illegal to do madlibs
- kvthweatt 10mo agoThat's the point though. You cannot just write anything and put it up. It must be accurate. Even that being said, you still shouldn't reupload your altered document anywhere.
- cess11 10mo agoWhy not? In some cases it might amount to fraud or something, but in general, why would it be prohibited?
- dylan604 10mo agothis tool coming out on the heels of the DOJ releasing a trove of redacted documents doesn't come across as coincidental to me. let's think about this for a bit longer from that idea of using this on legal evidence...why would doctoring a legal document be prohibited?
- nradov 10mo agoGenerally there is nothing illegal about altering a legal document, or even a strict definition of what counts as a legal document. Under some circumstances it could be illegal to alter a document and use that for fraud, or submit an altered document to a court or government agency. If the doctoring falsely defames someone then you could also open yourself up to a civil suit.
- dylan604 10mo agoIf you can be sued for it, sounds like it's prohibited to me
- nradov 10mo agoNope, that's not how the US legal system works. Anyone can sue for anything. That doesn't mean they'll win.
- cess11 10mo agoPerhaps I misunderstand what "sue" includes in US jurisdictions but prohibition in this context ought to be criminalisation, i.e. something that happens in the relation between the individual and the state, and to me 'suing' is something that happens in a relation between individuals.
- kvthweatt 10mo agoYou do you but I advise you don't. Standard CYA procedure For all we know, Epstein could have punished Trump and made him write "I'm a little bitch boy" 2,000 times and it took up 119 pages so every line got redacted. /madlibs
- cess11 10mo agoOK, and could you detail this "procedure"? Because to me it seems like altering and disseminating a document would be under 1st amendment protection, unless combined with some action that e.g. causes someone else harm or tricks the state into doing something it should not do or something.
- kvthweatt 10mo agoMy point being if it is properly and truly unredacted, then it's the truth. The CYA is just me saying I'm not responsible for anything anyone makes, because anyone can make a document say anything with this tool.
- cess11 10mo agoDid someone say that you should be responsible for what someone else does with this tool? If so, I missed it.
- circuit10 10mo agoI guess you mean offical legal documents or something, but your sentence doesn't say that or mention those so it comes across in a very confusing way (it implies that using Word is illegal because every time you type something you alter your document)
- rexpop 10mo agoThank you! The OP is being very ambiguous and cavalier with language.
- vessenes 10mo agoThis seems unlikely to be illegal unless you're representing them improperly.
- Nevermark 10mo ago> i cant imagine it being illegal to do madlibs Of course not illegal. When filled out with the official unredaction font [0], time stamped by the Ministry of Information, and delivered in triplicate, personally to Interrogation within 46 hours. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_(decorative_typeface) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_(decorative_type...
- NewsaHackO 10mo agoIt means "I am not responsible for any illegal shit you do with this software".
- kvthweatt 10mo agoPrecisely. The tool is neutral.
- singleshot_ 10mo ago> Republishing altered documents is legal, and you should use this to do so. Uh oh!