Warp wrote:
> scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
>> So every company should be forced to do things that are no extra cost to 
>> them?
> 
>   Every company should be (and is) forced to submit to basic human rights
> which include, among others, freedom of information. No company has the
> right to actively censor information from its clients.

	Eh - I disagree. But before I begin, I will admit that this is perhaps
a gray area, and it may take decades to get it right.

	Generally, at least here in the US, freedoms like the freedom of speech
are meant to be regarding the government - not private entities. It just
means that the government cannot restrict it. If an ISP wants to, they
can. If I run a physical structure where people debate stuff, I have the
right to restrict the topics.
	
	There are _rights_ that you can't violate, but not all freedoms are
rights in that sense. Occasionally, the government will "promote" one of
those freedoms to a right. But it hasn't happened yet with speech.

	I don't like what the ISP's may be planning, but I can't find a good
legal or constitutional argument against it (laws in Europe may be
different). I can see that in the future, perhaps access to the Internet
will be seen as a human right, and these limitations will then become
illegal. But it's not clear at this point.

>   An ISP blocking part of the internet would be active censorship. They

	Which, I believe, is legal for private entities to do - particularly if
they state it in the TOS.

	It's like if I own a store with a bulletin board. I have the right to
dictate what goes on there and what doesn't. I could arbitrarily say
that you can post anything you want to sell on it, but no postings
regarding private tutoring are allowed.


-- 
"The security of the Enterprise is of Paramount importance.


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message