Lavabit Founder Says He Had ‘Obligation’ to Shut Service

Re:Lavabit Founder Says He Had ‘Obligation’ to Shut Service by thecodeore on Tuesday August 13, 2013 @08:24PM (#6209238)

Actually they would, with a NSL the Government can (and has been suspected of in the past) force a Service provider to remain operational, or not to do anything that would interfere with the collection of the data they are looking for.

Now I dont know if the NSA attempted that with Lavabit, or if Lavabit willfully ignored that demand, etc but the government does have that legal power.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lavabit Founder Says He Had ‘Obligation’ to Shut Service by rbritton on Tuesday August 13, 2013 @09:59PM (#6209560)

Sounds remarkably familiar...

"In the name of the general welfare, to protect the people's security, to achieve full equality and total stability, it is decreed for the duration of the national emergency that:

...

Point Two. All industrial, commercial, manufacturing and business establishments of any nature whatsoever shall henceforth remain in operation, and the owners of such establishments shall not quit nor leave nor retire, nor close, sell or transfer their business, under penalty of the nationalization of their establishment and of any and all of their property.

..." [1]

[1] http://conservapedia.com/Directive_10-289

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lavabit Founder Says He Had ‘Obligation’ to Shut Service by gaadd33 on Tuesday August 13, 2013 @09:30PM (#6209478)

Where does the money come from in that case? Does the Government writes checks to keep things up and running then? Or does it prohibit declaring bankruptcy?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lavabit Founder Says He Had ‘Obligation’ to Shut Service by ds9 on Wednesday August 14, 2013 @11:51AM (#6212211)

But they can't prevent employees from resigning, can they? If yes, the 13th amendment is gone as well as the 4th.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_Un...

[ Parent | on HN ]