Re:Let Amazon know we're boycotting them because of Wikileaks
by Umalu on Sunday December 05, 2010 @12:28PM
(#1972005)
Amazon's choice: (1) host Wikileaks and risk getting shut down, or (2) drop Wikileaks, get boycotted. If choice (2) is as bad as choice (1), something I guess the boycotters hope for, then Amazon's choice is a Morton's fork: two equally bad outcomes. Why don't the boycotters stick their Morton's fork where it belongs: into those who wrote and enforce the laws they object to?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Let Amazon know we're boycotting them because of Wikileaks
by rbarooah on Sunday December 05, 2010 @12:33PM
(#1972014)
Because Amazon does not appear to have been compelled by law, so there's no law to change - just a vague sense of not wanting to be on the wrong side of powerful people. This is how the mafia works. It shouldn't be how the government works.
Re:Let Amazon know we're boycotting them because of Wikileaks
by jared314 on Sunday December 05, 2010 @12:52PM
(#1972081)
The people at Amazon might not actually like Wikileaks or the PR it brings. The government might not have anything to do with it.
Re:Let Amazon know we're boycotting them because of Wikileaks
by rbarooah on Sunday December 05, 2010 @04:02PM
(#1972668)
Except that we know that the government did contact Amazon and ask them to stop hosting wikileaks.
Re:Let Amazon know we're boycotting them because of Wikileaks
by jdp23 on Sunday December 05, 2010 @12:51PM
(#1972075)
The goal is to make 2 worse than 1 so that future companies, when faced with similar government pressure, will make a different choice.
As EFF says "Other Internet intermediaries should now expect to receive a phone call when some other member of Congress is unhappy with speech they are hosting. After all, it worked on Amazon."