this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2024
1109 points (99.1% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54716 readers
269 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I believe under the first amendment in the US Constitution and section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada you cannot silence someone’s freedom of speech/expression just because they discussed something you don’t like. This legal claim is bullshit right from the start due to constitutional protections
Also, online discussion is not evidence. To wit:
I murdered seven people before breakfast today. I love murdering so much!
Even confessions are not necessarily airtight. For example:
I shot JFK.
Police, when you get here, please knock; the doorbell's broken.
That's not really how that works.
The Constitution only protects you from the government.
Explain to me then how two US Federal District Judges upheld the first amendment during this entire fiasco with film studios
Are you talking about Burstyn v. Wilson (1952)?
Because that was about the state of New York attempting to censor a film. Not sure what case you're referencing.
Freedom of speech also means that individuals and companies cannot sue you for protected speech, cannot get your private data unless they have a very good reason