91–100 of 153 posts
The alt-left are dangerous but Dreamhost should resist until all legal channels are exhausted. Checks and balances!
What alt-left? Are you referring to community defense groups trying to protect their communities from Nazis? Dangerous to whom?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Correct. Pardon the source but I just searched for "antifa knife" and copied the first link: http://bigleaguepolitics.com/man-stabbed-antifa-mob-outside-... The alt-left is getting bolder and more dangerous.
And the alt-right is getting dumber. Seriously, "bigleaguepolitics.com"? Are you going to peddle Seth Rich conspiracy theories now too? Because that's also on their front page.
DreamHost is probably going to lose. The warrant is actually quite standard. Basically the DOJ is just grabbing everything so they can filter through the comments and logs at their convenience. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...
In the physical world, the government can search only one apartment in an apartment building with a single warrant; it can’t search the entire apartment building. Are the collective records of a website more like an apartment building or a single apartment? If this is the reasoning they're going then yes, Dreamhost is out of luck. One account is pretty obviously an apartment on a server (building) with the website be…
Perhaps the website is the "apartment building" and the accounts on the website are the apartments. In that case, not so obvious.
This is the proper thing to do for DreamHost. On an un-related matter, domain registrars (Google, Go-Daddy) shouldn't be the ones censoring free speech of the alt-right by revoking Daily Stormer's registration. However vile and despicable the views expressed on the site, they have a constitutional right to it. If they indulge in illegal activities, alerting law enforcement is the recommended course of action, just li…
I found hobby-lobby's denial of contraception illegal and unconstitutional, and I find Google/GoDaddy's actions unreasonable. In both cases, the left and right leaning crowd claimed the exact same exemption for their unreasonable actions. You're all the same - free speech and freedom when it suits you.
The whole motivation behind free speech is to keep it free, especially when it's unpalatable
Sorry, but antifa is more than Anti-Trump Activists, they are dangerous. They attack people for political reasons and are largely unpunished because they wear all black and wear masks. They are the clowns that started fires in berkeley and hit the Trump support in the head with a bike lock, causing a fractured skull. That's no good imo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also extremely pertinent that the warrant is being executed against an organization exercising political speech. That's very different from, say, the DoJ requesting visitor logs to a film torrent site.
> It's also extremely pertinent that the warrant is being > executed against an organization exercising political > speech. Why? If you hurt me (many innocent people were hurt), but you do it because you feel "political", it's OK? Isn't the law supposed to be blind, or do political groups have a "get out of jail free" card?
I wonder if eff will support them. Probably semi annual reminder time to consider donating to eff
Is the government really asking for all those visitor logs?
"Yes, they definitely are," says Electronic Frontier Foundation senior staff attorney Mark Rumold. EFF advocates for Internet privacy and free speech, and has advised DreamHost in its case.
Rumold tells NPR that when DreamHost first approached EFF about responding to the warrant, he guessed "that DOJ would realize how broad the warrant was, and say, oh you know, in fact we're not actually looking for IP logs for everyone who's ever visited the site" and would narrow its request accordingly.
But instead, the government insisted on DreamHost's compliance with the warrant as written.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also extremely pertinent that the warrant is being executed against an organization exercising political speech. That's very different from, say, the DoJ requesting visitor logs to a film torrent site.
> It's also extremely pertinent that the warrant is being > executed against an organization exercising political > speech. Why? If you hurt me (many innocent people were hurt), but you do it because you feel "political", it's OK? Isn't the law supposed to be blind, or do political groups have a "get out of jail free" card?
But I agree with you and hold a more cynical view that it's because laws are made by politicians.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also extremely pertinent that the warrant is being executed against an organization exercising political speech. That's very different from, say, the DoJ requesting visitor logs to a film torrent site.
> It's also extremely pertinent that the warrant is being > executed against an organization exercising political > speech. Why? If you hurt me (many innocent people were hurt), but you do it because you feel "political", it's OK? Isn't the law supposed to be blind, or do political groups have a "get out of jail free" card?
Yes, core political speech is Constitutionally protected [1]. You can charge people being violent while protecting their rights to say stupid things.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_Unite...
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.