Supreme Court pick: ISPs have First Amendment right to block websites

Re:Supreme Court pick: ISPs have First Amendment right to bl... by astrodust on Tuesday July 10, 2018 @05:37PM (#17502410)

There's always some sort of reasonable limit that must be imposed. The USPS is a neutral carrier but they're not required to transport dangerous materials or hostile devices like mail bombs.

Where that line is drawn is where there should be debate. By what definition is something hostile, and so on.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supreme Court pick: ISPs have First Amendment right to bl... by mjevans on Tuesday July 10, 2018 @06:44PM (#17502853)

The USPS does get to require that things are properly labeled and items which are /hazardous/ (such as highly flammable/reactive/etc materials) might require non-generic transport (which is that USPS is supposed to provide).

Are you proposing that EM emissions controlled entirely by the transporting party might spontaneously explode based on the content of the data as transcribed by those automated systems?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supreme Court pick: ISPs have First Amendment right to bl... by astrodust on Tuesday July 10, 2018 @08:58PM (#17503584)

I mean just as the USPS will not knowingly transport things like mail bombs, an ISP should be permitted to curtail traffic known to be harmful (e.g. DDOS variety).

Obviously the packets themselves won't explode.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supreme Court pick: ISPs have First Amendment right to bl... by craftyguy on Tuesday July 10, 2018 @05:43PM (#17502461)

Good point. Isn't this already defined though? For example, you cannot shout "fire!" in a crowded courthouse when there is no fire and expect to walk out without any penalties.

[ Parent | on HN ]