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

The Feds Get Permission to Seize Edward Snowden's Book Profits

reason.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 170 posts

Re: The Feds Get Permission to Seize Edward Snowden's Book Profits

#31

Post by onetimemanytime »

drdebug wrote: post #30
onetimemanytime wrote: post #20

To be fair, Snowden was given access to a lot of stuff because he promised not to reveal them outside of the chain of command. He did, and claimed that the chain was broken and the people needed to know. Fine. The government didn't even try to ban the the book (it would have been impossible anyway.) But, why should he profit ??

Because he had the courage to blow the whistle and now must find other sources of income maybe ?

as if Pooty Poot /FSB is not giving him a pension and /or housing. He can program...or wash dishes. Making money of the stuff he saw, can be made only by prior vetting, and it makes perfect sense.

Re: The Feds Get Permission to Seize Edward Snowden's Book Profits

#33

Post by [deleted] »

onetimemanytime wrote: post #31
drdebug wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because he had the courage to blow the whistle and now must find other sources of income maybe ?

as if Pooty Poot /FSB is not giving him a pension and /or housing. He can program...or wash dishes. Making money of the stuff he saw, can be made only by prior vetting, and it makes perfect sense.

[deleted]

Re: The Feds Get Permission to Seize Edward Snowden's Book Profits

#36

Post by no_opinions »

buboard wrote: post #22
no_opinions wrote: post #18

It would be great if there was world peace, happy families and spouses that stayed together forever, and no foreigners targeting your country. People often forget that foreign governments are targeting USA and US persons abroad. There isn't another move left but to have surveillance tools and ingest a lot of data. If the advantage is lost, it will be someone else having it. This also extends to military things. It'd…

> Other things include better social benefits, affordable housing, better representation as consumer (e.g. right to repair)? Moving to china is a good way to ensure all those, and you get free and pervasive surveilance as a bonus. what's not to love

They also don't have many social benefits, consumer representation or affordable housing.

If they had to pay US companies back for all the IP they've stolen / used without licensing, they'd be broke.

Re: The Feds Get Permission to Seize Edward Snowden's Book Profits

#37

Post by post_break »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #12
post_break wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's illegal to send him any money due to him being an enemy of the state.

The mere fact that you can't say for sure his exact status should raise a giant red flag about the state of our republic. He is certainly targeted and watched. If you send him money, you will likely be watched more carefully as well. Buying his book is a symbol of defiance more than anything else. That said, Snowden is not covered by official sanctions and does not even come up on Dow Jones as PEP or person of intere…

But there was this executive order? https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/0...

Re: The Feds Get Permission to Seize Edward Snowden's Book Profits

#38

Post by [deleted] »

no_opinions wrote: post #18

It would be great if there was world peace, happy families and spouses that stayed together forever, and no foreigners targeting your country. People often forget that foreign governments are targeting USA and US persons abroad. There isn't another move left but to have surveillance tools and ingest a lot of data. If the advantage is lost, it will be someone else having it. This also extends to military things. It'd…

[deleted]

Re: The Feds Get Permission to Seize Edward Snowden's Book Profits

#39

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

no_opinions wrote: post #18

It would be great if there was world peace, happy families and spouses that stayed together forever, and no foreigners targeting your country. People often forget that foreign governments are targeting USA and US persons abroad. There isn't another move left but to have surveillance tools and ingest a lot of data. If the advantage is lost, it will be someone else having it. This also extends to military things. It'd…

Why not both? I also question your premise of 'it does not relate to you'.

The data is there, collected and ready for analysis.. if you step out of line that is.

Re: The Feds Get Permission to Seize Edward Snowden's Book Profits

#40

Post by logfromblammo »

lacker wrote: post #24
onetimemanytime wrote: post #20

To be fair, Snowden was given access to a lot of stuff because he promised not to reveal them outside of the chain of command. He did, and claimed that the chain was broken and the people needed to know. Fine. The government didn't even try to ban the the book (it would have been impossible anyway.) But, why should he profit ??

I don’t care about Snowden making a profit, but I do care about the first amendment. The government is not allowed to impose a fine on speech they don’t like. That is not “free speech”.

Despite the Citizens United ruling, money is not equivalent to speech.

When it comes to selling published work, we do have a right, not made explicit in the amendments to the Constitution, to earn a livelihood. But that right is not absolute, such that it is not permissible to earn one's livelihood by committing property crimes, violent crimes, or crimes of deception.

The agreement he signed before gaining access to state secrets is backed by laws that anticipated the possibility that someone might someday be paid to reveal those secrets, and those laws attempted to remove the financial incentive for disclosure. They include sections on review of pre-print manuscripts intended for publication, which only apply to cleared individuals.

Snowden can spill as many of his own secrets as he pleases, and get paid for them. But the state cannot allow him to profit from revealing state secrets. It's counterproductive from a security standpoint.

Post reply on HN