79
Judge blocks federal officials from contacting tech companies
(www.engadget.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
79 points (97.6% liked)
Technology
59287 readers
4698 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Well... Yes, it probably is. Because it's political speech, and because there's not a direct link to fraud or causal harm. See US v. Alvarez, 617 F. 3d 1198. When Trump says that he's a stable genius, that's protected speech even though 180 degrees opposed to the truth.
You'll notice that e.g. what Trump's attorneys said in public was very, very different from what they said to courts; it's a criminal offense to lie to courts, but it's largely legal and protected to lie to the public for political ends.
Calling disinformation about a global pandemic political speech sure is something.
I hate that I agree with this. On the one hand, “lying about a pandemic during a pandemic” sure sounds a lot like “shouting fire in a crowded theater,” but things like the lab leak theory aren’t really a matter of public health. While there are times when the government can and should fight dangerous misinformation, this is the kind of executive power that needs to be kept in check by the courts for the executive’s own good.