Create accountLogin

Recent searches

No recent searches

Search options

Only available when logged in.
hachyderm.io is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
Hachyderm is a safe space, LGBTQIA+ and BLM, primarily comprised of tech industry professionals world wide. Note that many non-user account types have restrictions - please see our About page.

Administered by:

Server stats:

9.2K
active users

hachyderm.io: AboutStatusProfiles directoryPrivacy policy

Mastodon: AboutGet the appKeyboard shortcutsView source codev4.3.7

evacide

I see that Discourse is happening among people who think US courts have not, in fact, found that code is speech and is protected by the 1st Amendment: eff.org/cases/bernstein-v-us-d

Electronic Frontier Foundation · Bernstein v. US Department of JusticeEFF established that computer code is speech and shielded the developers of privacy-protecting software from government censorship. In 1995, researcher Dan Bernstein planned to distribute an encryption program he had written that could help prevent strangers from snooping on online communications, discovering passwords, and stealing credit card numbers. But draconian federal laws restricted the publication of his program, treating privacy protection as a potential threat to national security. EFF successfully sued the government on behalf of Bernstein, and a federal court affirmed, for the first time, that software code deserves First Amendment protection.
Jun 21, 2024, 10:11 PM·Public·Web
40boosts·75favorites
Quiet public
Jon Roach

@evacide I'm making copious notes this, thank you. Hypothetically, were I employed, my employer's policies about discussing its business using the internet might prevent me from explaining what I was going to use it for.

Public
Marty Fouts

@evacide The EFF apparently has made one of its rare errors. The Wikipedia article is more accurate: the 9th circuit withdrew its original ruling. Bernstein brought a second case but the court asked him to drop it. There is no ruling either way. Here’s Bernstein’s press release from the second case cr.yp.to/export/2003/10.15-ber

Wikipedia en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernst

Quiet public
Räucherkäse

@MartyFouts @evacide I love the last part of that press release:

> I hope the government sticks to its promises and leaves me alone,
> But if they change their mind and start harassing Internet-security
researchers, I'll be back.

And everyone in the same position should do the same.

Public
SpaceLifeForm

@evacide

Which is why @rms created GPL because one has Copyright over what they write, and what they write is Free Speach under the 1st Ammendment.

Of course, Fascists hate GPL because they can not monetize the code.

#GPL#CopyRight#FLOSS
Public
Steve Bellovin

@evacide The Bernstein case was mooted when the 9th Circuit agreed to rehear the case en banc, but then Commerce changed the export rules. There are at least two other appellate cases on code as speech, Universal City Studios v. Corley, 273 F.3d 429 (2nd Cir. 2001) and Junger v. Daley, 209 F.3d 481 (6th Cir. 2000). The upshot: code can be speech but isn't always—there's a functional component and an expressive component, and courts have to figure out which is implicated in any given case.

Public
Kenneth

@SteveBellovin Oooo, this hurts my brain, albeit in a way I like. However functional & expressive are defined, the application of the Diamond Vis-à-vis Saw shall be most interesting, ja?
@evacide

Quiet public
Nicklas Johnson 🏳️‍🌈

@evacide
Probably a lot of people having Thoughts about it weren't even born yet when that case happened.

I remember we were watching it pretty closely at the mom&pop ISP I was working for because of the implications for e-commerce and online security.

@jstatepost

ExploreLive feeds
About