http://techliberation.com/2007/05/03/code-is-speech/ Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology Mon, 13 Feb 2012 21:44:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://techliberation.com/2007/05/03/code-is-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-50707 Steve R. Thu, 03 May 2007 20:22:30 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/05/03/code-is-speech/#comment-50707 <p>Recently, you raised the question of <a href="http://www.techliberation.com/archives/042291.php" rel="nofollow">Patents vs. the Rule of Law</a>. I wrote that: <i>"1. The "Rule of Law" (including a respect of property rights) will only work if the members of society believe that the law is really working for the benefit of society. If the law is viewed as a vehicle to solely further the goals of special interests, then the populace will feel minimal obligation to comply with the law. Given this scenario, those who are technologically savvy would not only feel free to break technological roadblocks, but would also consider it to be their civic duty." Responding to the events at Digg, <a href="http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/" rel="nofollow">Ed Felten</a> wrote </i><i>"Which brings us to the civil disobedience angle. It’s no secret that many in the tech community despise the DMCA’s anticircumvention provisions. If you’re going to defy a law to show your disagreement with it, you’ll look for a situation where (1) the application of the law is especially inappropriate, (2) your violation does no actual harm, and (3) many others are doing the same thing so the breadth of opposition to the law is evident. That’s what we see here."</i></p> Recently, you raised the question of Patents vs. the Rule of Law. I wrote that: “1. The “Rule of Law” (including a respect of property rights) will only work if the members of society believe that the law is really working for the benefit of society. If the law is viewed as a vehicle to solely further the goals of special interests, then the populace will feel minimal obligation to comply with the law. Given this scenario, those who are technologically savvy would not only feel free to break technological roadblocks, but would also consider it to be their civic duty.” Responding to the events at Digg, Ed Felten wrote “Which brings us to the civil disobedience angle. It’s no secret that many in the tech community despise the DMCA’s anticircumvention provisions. If you’re going to defy a law to show your disagreement with it, you’ll look for a situation where (1) the application of the law is especially inappropriate, (2) your violation does no actual harm, and (3) many others are doing the same thing so the breadth of opposition to the law is evident. That’s what we see here.”

]]> http://techliberation.com/2007/05/03/code-is-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-38108 Steve R. Thu, 03 May 2007 19:22:30 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/05/03/code-is-speech/#comment-38108 <p>Recently, you raised the question of <a href="http://www.techliberation.com/archives/042291.php" rel="nofollow">Patents vs. the Rule of Law</a>. I wrote that: <i>"1. The "Rule of Law" (including a respect of property rights) will only work if the members of society believe that the law is really working for the benefit of society. If the law is viewed as a vehicle to solely further the goals of special interests, then the populace will feel minimal obligation to comply with the law. Given this scenario, those who are technologically savvy would not only feel free to break technological roadblocks, but would also consider it to be their civic duty." Responding to the events at Digg, <a href="http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/" rel="nofollow">Ed Felten</a> wrote <i>"Which brings us to the civil disobedience angle. It’s no secret that many in the tech community despise the DMCA’s anticircumvention provisions. If you’re going to defy a law to show your disagreement with it, you’ll look for a situation where (1) the application of the law is especially inappropriate, (2) your violation does no actual harm, and (3) many others are doing the same thing so the breadth of opposition to the law is evident. That’s what we see here."</i> </i></p> Recently, you raised the question of Patents vs. the Rule of Law. I wrote that: “1. The “Rule of Law” (including a respect of property rights) will only work if the members of society believe that the law is really working for the benefit of society. If the law is viewed as a vehicle to solely further the goals of special interests, then the populace will feel minimal obligation to comply with the law. Given this scenario, those who are technologically savvy would not only feel free to break technological roadblocks, but would also consider it to be their civic duty.” Responding to the events at Digg, Ed Felten wrote “Which brings us to the civil disobedience angle. It’s no secret that many in the tech community despise the DMCA’s anticircumvention provisions. If you’re going to defy a law to show your disagreement with it, you’ll look for a situation where (1) the application of the law is especially inappropriate, (2) your violation does no actual harm, and (3) many others are doing the same thing so the breadth of opposition to the law is evident. That’s what we see here.”

]]> http://techliberation.com/2007/05/03/code-is-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-50706 Crosbie Fitch Thu, 03 May 2007 17:09:05 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/05/03/code-is-speech/#comment-50706 <p>Kate Bush recently sang the first umpteen digits of Pi, so this is not without precedent...</p> Kate Bush recently sang the first umpteen digits of Pi, so this is not without precedent…

]]> http://techliberation.com/2007/05/03/code-is-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-38107 Crosbie Fitch Thu, 03 May 2007 16:09:05 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/05/03/code-is-speech/#comment-38107 <p>Kate Bush recently sang the first umpteen digits of Pi, so this is not without precedent...</p> Kate Bush recently sang the first umpteen digits of Pi, so this is not without precedent…

]]>