Slashdot Mirror
EFF Sues To Invalidate FOSTA, An Unconstitutional Internet Censorship Law (eff.org)
schwit1 quotes a report from the Electronic Frontier Foundation: We are asking a court to declare the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017 ("FOSTA") unconstitutional and prevent it from being enforced. The law was written so poorly that it actually criminalizes a substantial amount of protected speech and, according to experts, actually hinders efforts to prosecute sex traffickers and aid victims. In our lawsuit, two human rights organizations, an individual advocate for sex workers, a certified non-sexual massage therapist, and the Internet Archive, are challenging the law as an unconstitutional violation of the First and Fifth Amendments. Although the law was passed by Congress for the worthy purpose of fighting sex trafficking, its broad language makes criminal of those who advocate for and provide resources to adult, consensual sex workers and actually hinders efforts to prosecute sex traffickers and aid victims. The EFF goes on to cite some examples of how FOSTA has already censored the internet. Most notably, two days after FOSTA was passed in the Senate, "Craigslist eliminated its Personals section, including non-sexual subcategories such as 'Missed Connections' and 'Strictly Platonic,'" reports the EFF. Reddit even removed some of its subreddits out of fear of future lawsuits.
there are very few places in the U.S. where prostitution is legal.
Yes, and in those places, prostitutes should be free to conduct their business as regulated. They should not be blocked by an overbroad law designed to protect someone else.
Unlike you, some of us actually like being free. Freedom was, once upon a time, a core American value, protected by patriots who laid down their lives for it. Your personal disapproval of something is NOT justification for making it illegal (and no, dammit, I am not talking about your disapproval of human trafficking, I am talking about your disapproval of everything else that is NOT human trafficking but is blocked by this law).
People should be free to post personals on Craigslist. There are better ways of fighting human trafficking than taking away unrelated civil liberties.
I'm breaking the rule not to respond to AC to say that's not what Jack said. He never said that rules are bad, but that *too many* rules are bad. Rules should be added with caution, knowing that each rule has a real material and human cost and that too many rules compromise system flexibility. Kind of like unit tests. ;-)
To the other coward: Learn to read without letting your emotions overwhelm you. I'm not left. And I think that unnecessary moralizing, virtue signaling rules from the right are just as bad as unnecessary social justice, virtue signaling rules from the left.
It's not even arguable. Stiff penalties for crimes of strict liability are a way for the legislature to immediately force any entity that uses other peoples' money (i.e., almost all businesses) to change their behavior in ways that could be interpreted, even in a completely cross-eyed way, to break the law. This is the driving force of chilling effect, and it's why people who provide public venues aren't supposed to be liable for how the public uses them.
Au contraire, it's the righties who keep using "Hillary lost" as a catch-all comeback to any and all criticism or attempt to hold them accountable for their words and actions. They wouldn't feel the need to do this if they weren't afraid deep down inside that the allegations tainting their "victory" might well be true.
Turning it back on them is just a little reminder that—successful or not—crimes are still crimes.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
You're not free so long as somebody controls your access to food, shelter, healthcare, education and transportation (the latter being required to access the former). Until you have reliable access to those things then you're one bad year (or month if you're 40% of Americans) away from disaster and doing whatever anyone tells you to get those things. You're what's referred to as a Wage Slave.
Your definition of freedom is extremely short sighted. All of those things have to be produced somehow. They aren't free and can't be given to everyone for nothing. So in order for everyone to have them you have to force someone else to create them. You're enslaving someone else. You're doing the exact thing you're claiming to fight against.
The Official Site of 1337 Pwnage