Exactly right about what? The original claim is that the French government is trying to muzzle criticism. You then bring up the case of a humorist condemned for his antisemitic views as a supporting example. This doesn't make any sense, unless you're going for some weird conspiracy theory - in which case, I'll believe any conspiracy theory as long as comes with convincing evidence, of which there doesn't seem to be any.
> The fundamental problem with "hate laws" in the context of speech is the definition of "hate", totalitarian governments tend to widen that definitions in order to suppress adversaries, this might be theoretical in your case but it's still an attack victor.
> The Internet must be built on the example of the "freest" framework available and that is the US's.
I'm on the fence about it. Besides, even in the US there are limits on freedom of speech.
Billionaire Compares Outrage Over Rich In SF To Kristallnacht
http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2014/01/26/266685...
JPMorgan Chase's Jamie Dimon: Anti-Banking Sentiment 'A Form Of Discrimination'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/25/jamie-dimon-discrim...
"Hate laws" are censorship. "Hateful" speech is equally protected under the US constitution, and any political movements it might inspire will not be infringed upon by the government.
The fundamental problem with "hate laws" in the context of speech is the definition of "hate", totalitarian governments tend to widen that definitions in order to suppress adversaries, this might be theoretical in your case but it's still an attack victor.
The Internet must be built on the example of the "freest" framework available and that is the US's.