Now that you've accepted that we should censor fraud speech you have to define the grey line between unacceptable fraud and acceptable disinformation.

> fraud speech

This is you fundamentally misunderstanding what is meant by "speech". The statement itself is not illegal. The act of misrepresenting the transaction being agreed to is what's illegal.

A specific act that involves many components, only one of which happens to be speech, has been made illegal. The speech component itself has not.

There are certain situations where speech itself is restricted. This is not one of them though.

This is just wrong. There is all kinds of commercial speech, especially around advertisement, that is banned before any transaction is agreed to.