3 ms·

Code is speech. Forcing someone to implement something is legally-compelled speech, assuming no complicating factor like commerce.

otterley 2mo ago
That argument has been going on for decades, and has had few victories in the court system. The DMCA, which prohibits trafficking in anticircumvention devices, even though there's a lot of code in them, is still alive and well.
- lrvick 2mo ago
  And the DMCA has been rightfully weakened to the point that archive.org has every Nintendo Gamecube game ever made hosted for the public, for years, uncontested. So too will these other silly laws go I expect.
  - iamnothere 2mo ago
    Not only that, but people like myself are working on underground distribution networks in case they’re ever needed. Absolute worst case we’ll do sneakernet. More likely we’ll just distribute via overlay networks. Some of us are crazy enough to be full on free speech martyrs, believe it or not.
hnlmorg 2mo ago
I’m not a lawyer and even I know that argument would never hold up given the plethora of other laws that have been implemented through software. Not to mention copyright and patent claims too.
- lrvick 2mo ago
  Being afraid and hoping you are never forced to add code to a project you do not want to add is letting the chilling effects work as designed. We need to all loudly and publicly say "Fuck off, I will defend my rights if needed", so they understand how expensive the fight is going to be. Fear is power. Do not give your enemies power.
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
  - otterley 2mo ago
    > hoping you are never forced to add code to a project you do not want to add You keep saying that, but that's not the realistic outcome. The realistic outcome isn't an injunction forcing you to add code. It'd be to force you to pull it out of circulation.
    - lrvick 2mo ago
      They cannot force me to do either. But it would be a fascinating case study to watch them try. I feel it would only help prove the decentralized censorship-resistant tactics of the project work as intended. Government overreach should be in the threat model of every FOSS project.
      - hnlmorg 2mo ago
        There are already case studies that demonstrate governments can do exactly what the GP lawyer claimed could happen. You’re not treading any new and untested ground here.
  - hnlmorg 2mo ago
    People don’t disagree with your moral position. The problem is you’re bringing a butter knife to a drone fight. There are more effective ways protest this law than posting punk-rhetoric on a nerd forum for a project that will likely fly under the governments radar anyway.
    - iamnothere 2mo ago
      Public expressions of defiance are motivating to people who don’t yet recognize that they have allies.
      - lrvick 2mo ago
soulofmischief 2mo ago
Is is also clear that there are major deficits in our Constitution but that the amendment process has failed to survive a modern world. Any of our original forefathers would recognize today's American federal government as an overreach from their indended form of government. The only reason we aren't seeing a Boston Tea Party 2.0 over the recent string of coordinated assaults against our inalienable human rights is because surveillance capitalism is already coarsely achieving its goals of suppressing any civic participation which exists between the spectrum of ineffective political protest to the most desperate, radical action. Some of those among us simply cannot drink this koolaid. A quote from MLK, Jr: I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law. Further reading https://letterfromjail.com/ https://letterfromjail.com/
- blackqueeriroh 2mo ago
  Yeah but most of y’all wouldn’t accept the imprisonment willingly.
  - soulofmischief 2mo ago
    Who is "most of y'all"? Sounds like a generalization to me and a poor attempt at an appeal to character in order to undermine the perspective I've shared. Have you been to prison? I've been incarcerated before already after having my rights violated. Let's not go there. Make less assumptions.
    - otterley 2mo ago
      Incarcerated temporarily (e.g. awaiting trial or a prosecution decision), or actually convicted and sentenced to imprisonment? These two things are not the same.
      - lrvick 2mo ago
        No one is being convicted and doing hard time for refusing to add age verification to a Linux distro. This is just more fear mongering. It would be a fine or a few days of jail until bail is posted, at worst. And then a media shit show where the public is certain to side with the developer who is having their rights violated to discourage this from ever happening again. The public even got the back of weev for his bullshit arrest. Weev, one of the shittiest people to ever live. But rights are rights.
kube-system 2mo ago
There is pretty solid case law for the constitutionality of a variety of compliance requirements. If you can comply by being silent then they aren't really compelling you to do say anything.

otterley 2mo ago

That argument has been going on for decades, and has had few victories in the court system. The DMCA, which prohibits trafficking in anticircumvention devices, even though there's a lot of code in them, is still alive and well.

lrvick 2mo ago
And the DMCA has been rightfully weakened to the point that archive.org has every Nintendo Gamecube game ever made hosted for the public, for years, uncontested. So too will these other silly laws go I expect.
- iamnothere 2mo ago
  Not only that, but people like myself are working on underground distribution networks in case they’re ever needed. Absolute worst case we’ll do sneakernet. More likely we’ll just distribute via overlay networks. Some of us are crazy enough to be full on free speech martyrs, believe it or not.

hnlmorg 2mo ago

I’m not a lawyer and even I know that argument would never hold up given the plethora of other laws that have been implemented through software. Not to mention copyright and patent claims too.

lrvick 2mo ago
Being afraid and hoping you are never forced to add code to a project you do not want to add is letting the chilling effects work as designed. We need to all loudly and publicly say "Fuck off, I will defend my rights if needed", so they understand how expensive the fight is going to be. Fear is power. Do not give your enemies power.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- otterley 2mo ago
  > hoping you are never forced to add code to a project you do not want to add You keep saying that, but that's not the realistic outcome. The realistic outcome isn't an injunction forcing you to add code. It'd be to force you to pull it out of circulation.
  - lrvick 2mo ago
    They cannot force me to do either. But it would be a fascinating case study to watch them try. I feel it would only help prove the decentralized censorship-resistant tactics of the project work as intended. Government overreach should be in the threat model of every FOSS project.
    - hnlmorg 2mo ago
      There are already case studies that demonstrate governments can do exactly what the GP lawyer claimed could happen. You’re not treading any new and untested ground here.
- hnlmorg 2mo ago
  People don’t disagree with your moral position. The problem is you’re bringing a butter knife to a drone fight. There are more effective ways protest this law than posting punk-rhetoric on a nerd forum for a project that will likely fly under the governments radar anyway.
  - iamnothere 2mo ago
    Public expressions of defiance are motivating to people who don’t yet recognize that they have allies.
    - lrvick 2mo ago

soulofmischief 2mo ago

Is is also clear that there are major deficits in our Constitution but that the amendment process has failed to survive a modern world. Any of our original forefathers would recognize today's American federal government as an overreach from their indended form of government. The only reason we aren't seeing a Boston Tea Party 2.0 over the recent string of coordinated assaults against our inalienable human rights is because surveillance capitalism is already coarsely achieving its goals of suppressing any civic participation which exists between the spectrum of ineffective political protest to the most desperate, radical action. Some of those among us simply cannot drink this koolaid. A quote from MLK, Jr: I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law. Further reading https://letterfromjail.com/ https://letterfromjail.com/

blackqueeriroh 2mo ago
Yeah but most of y’all wouldn’t accept the imprisonment willingly.
- soulofmischief 2mo ago
  Who is "most of y'all"? Sounds like a generalization to me and a poor attempt at an appeal to character in order to undermine the perspective I've shared. Have you been to prison? I've been incarcerated before already after having my rights violated. Let's not go there. Make less assumptions.
  - otterley 2mo ago
    Incarcerated temporarily (e.g. awaiting trial or a prosecution decision), or actually convicted and sentenced to imprisonment? These two things are not the same.
    - lrvick 2mo ago
      No one is being convicted and doing hard time for refusing to add age verification to a Linux distro. This is just more fear mongering. It would be a fine or a few days of jail until bail is posted, at worst. And then a media shit show where the public is certain to side with the developer who is having their rights violated to discourage this from ever happening again. The public even got the back of weev for his bullshit arrest. Weev, one of the shittiest people to ever live. But rights are rights.

kube-system 2mo ago

There is pretty solid case law for the constitutionality of a variety of compliance requirements. If you can comply by being silent then they aren't really compelling you to do say anything.