News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The nightmarish SOPA hearings by pnathan on Thursday December 15, 2011 @06:58PM (#3358674)
The Internet is not commerce. It is a medium of communication.

You might as well call writing in a newspaper commerce, or a telephone system, or a city plaza.

That commercial acts transpire through the medium does not make the medium an actualization of platonic commerce.

Re:The nightmarish SOPA hearings by andrewpi on Thursday December 15, 2011 @07:02PM (#3358682)
More specifically, the Internet is a channel or instrumentality of interstate commerce, both of which the US Supreme Court has held fall under the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce.
Re:The nightmarish SOPA hearings by ericd on Thursday December 15, 2011 @07:32PM (#3358787)
That implies that the internet's primary purpose is commerce, which I wouldn't say is the case.

It is great for advertising goods, just as a newspaper or magazine is. That doesn't make a newspaper just a medium for commerce.

Re:The nightmarish SOPA hearings by andrewpi on Thursday December 15, 2011 @07:38PM (#3358804)
I think your definition of commerce is much narrower than the accepted legal definition. Communications is commerce, hence why the FCC can regulate radio transmissions.
Re:The nightmarish SOPA hearings by ericd on Thursday December 15, 2011 @07:56PM (#3358854)
Is commerce taken to mean any action that crosses state boundaries, then? Could you point me to a source that backs that up?
Re:The nightmarish SOPA hearings by andrewpi on Thursday December 15, 2011 @07:59PM (#3358865)
Probably the most recent authority outlining the limits of the commerce clause would be the case of United States v. Lopez (1995).
Re:The nightmarish SOPA hearings by andrewpi on Thursday December 15, 2011 @08:35PM (#3358971)
Search for "channels of commerce." Congress can regulate things such as roadways, waterways, etc, where commerce flows.
Re:The nightmarish SOPA hearings by ericd on Thursday December 15, 2011 @08:21PM (#3358930)
But that case has nothing to do with communications, and congress lost the case.
Re:The nightmarish SOPA hearings by rayiner on Friday December 16, 2011 @07:20AM (#3360488)
The case lays out the current understanding of Congress's power over commerce:

"Consistent with this structure, we have identified three broad categories of activity that Congress may regulate under its commerce power... First, Congress may regulate the use of the channels of interstate commerce... Second, Congress is empowered to regulate and protect the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, or persons or things in interstate commerce, even though the threat may come only from intrastate activities... Finally, Congress' commerce authority includes the power to regulate those activities having a substantial relation to interstate commerce, i.e., those activities that substantially affect interstate commerce."

Re:The nightmarish SOPA hearings by ericd on Friday December 16, 2011 @10:50PM (#3363318)
Thanks for clarifying, that does seem to imply pretty widespread authority. What if commerce is only an incidental use of something, though? Commerce is related somehow to a huge number of things which couldn't be considered primarily commercial. There has to be some reasonable limit placed on these things. The internet, radio, newspapers, and so on are not used primarily for commerce.
Re:The nightmarish SOPA hearings by rayiner on Friday December 16, 2011 @06:30AM (#3360390)
The power to regulate commerce encompasses the mediums of commerce. This issue was litigated in 1824 and decided in favor of the broad reading of the commerce power espoused by the federalist camp of framers.
Re:The nightmarish SOPA hearings by anigbrowl on Thursday December 15, 2011 @08:04PM (#3358883)
Neither is a navigable river, but the federal government regulates then under the commerce power and has virtually since inception.