Mailchimp Slams Door for Crypto Content Without Warning

Re:Mailchimp Slams Door for Crypto Content Without Warning by JohnHaugeland on Monday August 15, 2022 @05:39PM (#32475756)

Remember when I said

> or a misrepresentation of Marilyn Hall's decision that code is speech somehow means code is free speech

Predictably, you referenced Marilyn Hall's decision that code is speech, and misrepresented it as support that code is free speech

Literally exactly what I said you would do

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Mailchimp Slams Door for Crypto Content Without Warning by randomran01234 on Tuesday August 16, 2022 @11:19PM (#32491942)

“free speech” = “protected by first amendment”

Do you disagree with the widespread reporting on the outcome of this case?

https://www.britannica.com/event/Bernstein-vs-the-US-Departm...

> Bernstein v. the U.S. Department of State, landmark legal decision (1996) that set two important precedents in the field of digital technology. First, it ruled that U.S. government regulations that barred the export of encryption software were unconstitutionally restrictive; second, it declared that software source code can be a form of protected free speech.

and

https://casetext.com/case/bernstein-v-united-states-dept-of-...

> The district court found that the Source Code was speech protected by the First Amendment, see Bernstein v. Department of State, 922 F. Supp. 1426 (N.D. Cal. 1996) ("Bernstein I")

[ Parent | on HN ]