Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Poland Justice Minister announces online freedom of speech bill

polandin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 386 posts

Re: Poland Justice Minister announces online freedom of speech bill

#121

Post by nitwit005 »

afuchs wrote: post #94
root_axis wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, r/jailbait was removed as a reaction to the FOSTA laws which explicitly carve out an exception to section 230 for content that could be considered related to sex trafficking, so in this sense it actually did create a new legal risk compared to other non-sex related subs.

I thought that subreddit was banned because of the negative media attention that it received. Wasn't that years before SESTA and FOSTA were passed?

Yes, the timing matched with the negative media attention, similar to the removals of a few Trump subreddits recently.

Re: Poland Justice Minister announces online freedom of speech bill

#122

Post by jariel »

seba_dos1 wrote: post #90
jariel wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment misrepresents the situation by failing to indicate that the 'Constitutional Crisis' started before the current Law and Justice government took power by the previous governments anti-constitutional actions of trying to appoint Constitutional Court judges ahead of the end of their terms. For a summary of events: [1] Imagine if Barack Obama / George Bush decided to go ahead and punt some SCOTUS members ahea…

> This comment misrepresents the situation by failing to indicate that the 'Constitutional Crisis' started before the current Law and Justice government took power by the previous governments flagrant anti-constitutional actions of trying to appoint Supreme Court Judges ahead of the end of their terms. It was the Constitutional Court, not Supreme Court. Also, no, not really - that didn't start the crisis in any reaso…

"Also, no, not really - that didn't start the crisis in any reasonable meaning of that word."

The entire world disagrees with this.

The issue, in public, is very clear - actions by the the previous government in the summer of 2015 were declared anti-constitutional, and later actions highly undemocratic.

There is no doubt that this was the 'start of the crisis' by any objective measure.

It doesn't matter how much we may not like certain 'current authorities' - History is History - people should stop trying to rewrite it to suit their narrative. Suppressing these unfortunate events is not going to help anyone's cause in the long run.

Re: Poland Justice Minister announces online freedom of speech bill

#123

Post by dharmab »

protonimitate wrote: post #92
mabbo wrote: post #5

> Under its provisions, social media services will not be allowed to remove content or block accounts if the content on them does not break Polish law. This is kind of insane. So if I offer a free website- a private company operating as I like- I would be forbidden from removing content from my own website that I don't like because the person who wrote it- again, not a paying customer- wants it to be there. Not only…

I'm not a lawyer, and at the risk of sounding ignorant, but I don't understand how a Polish law can be enforced on a company/service/piece of hardware under US (presumably, but could be any other) jurisdiction. At the end of the day, the data is sitting on a piece of hardware somewhere , isn't the "owning" place the one that dictates what laws can be enforced on it?

IANAL but as I understand it, most governments will consider something to be in their jurisdiction if the user is within their jurisdiction, even if the server is not. See GDPR, which applies to all EU citizens globally- even one residing in the United States using US web services.

Re: Poland Justice Minister announces online freedom of speech bill

#125

Post by eropple »

anonunivgrad wrote: post #72
bigfudge wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gay marriage has a popular majority in the UK and Ireland in both polls and referenda. Is it that different in the US? Interpreting old documents is hard, and where there is silence or substantial ambiguity it seems right to err on the side of popular opinion.

You can't really defend the US Supreme Court's actions on gay marriage from any legal viewpoint other than "because five justices said so" and "what are you gonna do about it." Popular opinion is not the talisman of judicial interpretation. If the public wants its way, they can vote for it. For what it's worth, the public did not support gay marriage until after the federal courts made it a fait accompli. E.g. In a r…

What "the federal courts in America" did is state that the rights of other human beings are not up for a vote.

Re: Poland Justice Minister announces online freedom of speech bill

#126

Post by jessaustin »

timeon wrote: post #106
jariel wrote: post #23

Legitimacy aside - purely from a political perspective - this is pretty smart. Poland is at odds with the EU bureaucracy over a bunch of things, and 'Freedom of Expression' is definitely a populist issue a lot of people can feasibly rally behind. Whatever the reality is, the optics are good. It puts the EU in a position of having to 'defend censorship' (or at least detractors could say as much).

> a lot of people can feasibly rally behind. I do not think that is the case. 'Free speech' is not new topic in EU, but most people who are talking about it are neo-nazis. This proposal is obviously dictature of free speech.

True free speech is correct speech?

Re: Poland Justice Minister announces online freedom of speech bill

#127

Post by drocer88 »

dan-robertson wrote: post #78
bigfudge wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gay marriage has a popular majority in the UK and Ireland in both polls and referenda. Is it that different in the US? Interpreting old documents is hard, and where there is silence or substantial ambiguity it seems right to err on the side of popular opinion.

Gay marriage had a popular majority in favour before it became legal (though obviously a popular majority doesn’t necessarily mean much in the US system.) Compare this to interracial marriage which was not approved of by the majority of the population for many years after it was made fully legal across the country .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_California_Proposition_8

Re: Poland Justice Minister announces online freedom of speech bill

#128

Post by pseudalopex »

afuchs wrote: post #94
root_axis wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, r/jailbait was removed as a reaction to the FOSTA laws which explicitly carve out an exception to section 230 for content that could be considered related to sex trafficking, so in this sense it actually did create a new legal risk compared to other non-sex related subs.

I thought that subreddit was banned because of the negative media attention that it received. Wasn't that years before SESTA and FOSTA were passed?

Wikipedia says 2011. So yes.

Re: Poland Justice Minister announces online freedom of speech bill

#129

Post by protonimitate »

anonunivgrad wrote: post #110
protonimitate wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a lawyer, and at the risk of sounding ignorant, but I don't understand how a Polish law can be enforced on a company/service/piece of hardware under US (presumably, but could be any other) jurisdiction. At the end of the day, the data is sitting on a piece of hardware somewhere , isn't the "owning" place the one that dictates what laws can be enforced on it?

If you want to do business in a country, then you have to follow the laws of that country. Polish courts would enter judgment against the company for violating Polish law, premising their jurisdiction on the activities of that company within their borders (e.g. accepting payment in polish currency, selling ads to polish businesses, charging for polish views/clicks). They can then seize the company's property in Polan…

Makes sense, thanks.

Re: Poland Justice Minister announces online freedom of speech bill

#130

Post by paganel »

root_axis wrote: post #69
ceilingcorner wrote: post #39

This will continue happening around the world. Who knew - sovereign states don’t want American megacorporations deciding what ideas are appropriate? Prepare for massive Balkanization of the Internet.

This is a dishonest line. The internet is federated, they don't have to use websites created by American megacorporations.

> websites created by American megacorporations

Where's the money for creating non-American websites?

Yes, I'm still bitter after 10 or so years that the local business directory website/start-up I was working on got part of its data copied by the up and coming Google Places. We folded, of course, Google Places "transferred" its data to the whole Google ecosystem. I was telling my boss at the time "they can't let Google do this, is theft", they let Google do that, and then some.

Post reply on HN