Slashdot Mirror
Joking About Giving Money To ISIS Can Cost You Money (arstechnica.com)
Reader rudy_wayne writes: A person who was using Venmo, an app that allows people to send money to each other via their phones, sent $42 to repay a friend, and jokingly labelled it "ISIS Beer Fund". He immediately got an e-mail from Venmo questioning the purpose of the money. Although he tried to explain "The $42 was payment to a dear friend for two pitchers of Samuel Adams Boston Lager" he was informed "Due to OFAC regulations, we are not allowed to give the funds back to you or issue a refund." The Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control is a 54-year-old institution, quietly working to keep money out of the hands of America's enemies.From the report, "It turns out -- shockingly -- this isn't the first time someone's Venmo transaction was cut off at the knees with a reference to subjects that are a matter of national security. Venmo won't explicitly say what words will trigger blockage, Gawker pointed out in October.
Why does the Office of Foreign Assets Control regulations apply to an unarguably domestic transaction?
Is this some sort of goofy legal technicality that because the transaction went through the internet they routed it to an off shore server and back just so they could listen in?
In a sane and just society, civil court wouldn't be the right place to deal with it. In reality, this is a simple issue of theft and all the guy should have to do is file a police report and wait for the perp at Venmo to get arrested.
But of course, we live in an insane and unjust society where essential rights are allowed to be abrogated by contract law. Until we fix that, we will never progress.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
So everyone, add spook.lines to your outgoing money transfers.
^ https://github.com/emacs-mirror/emacs/blob/master/etc/spook.lines
Fine tidbit: The fire in a theater quote was originally from a Supreme Court ruling (and now considered one of the worst of all time) that went on to do a lot more than outlaw stirring up a stampede needlessly, and uphold a law making it illegal to publish pamphlets that urged people to "resist the draft using all legal means", during WW I.
The ruling argued it interfered with Congress' power to raise armies via recruitment. The judge who authored it soon changed his mind, but it was not overturned until freaking 1969.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.