[42508] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: On Internet and social responsibility
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Schwartz)
Mon Sep 17 15:11:13 2001
From: David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com>
To: <gmirsky@axiowave.com>, 'Andy Walden' <andy@tigerteam.net>,
David Schwartz <David Schwartz@merit.edu>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 12:10:40 -0700
In-Reply-To: <EB5FFC72F183D411B38200062957342960BEC3@r2d2.axiowave.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <20010917191041.AAA11746@shell.webmaster.com@whenever>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 09:08:51 -0400, Greg Mirsky wrote:
>Sorry, but I want to point out that Vadim (and I'll second his=
opinion) was
>talking about a particular site www.Kavkaz.org which is set by=
Chechen
>terrorists (sorry again, I wouldn't call them "rebels" since it=
an insult to
>those who rebel for cause).
>Last time I've checked Chechnya was not part of USA and thus=
none of them is
>a US citizen unless there are mercenaries. If that's the case=
then why
>you're talking about Freedom of Speech and First Amendment?
=09Because the mechanism that would shut the company down would be=
for the U.S.
government to go after that company for the content of their=
speech. If you
imagine some other mechanism, then perhaps other arguments would=
apply.
>How it's
>applicable to foreign terrorist organization that uses American=
company to
>spread its ideas?
=09Because if American companies want to spread the speech of=
foreign
terrorists, that's their right. The government of the United=
States should
not be prosecuting them for the content of their speech.
>Or perhaps you're more tolerable to Chechen terrorists
>using American info-space then if it would be bin Laden using=
it? Would your
>company host a site that posts Laden's fatwahs (sp?)? Would you=
provide them
>with 24*7 customer support? If not, please try to explain to me,=
where's
>difference?
=09No, I wouldn't. The difference is, my company is mine and it's=
my right to
choose what speech I wish to carry over my network. Another=
network carrying
someone else's speech is not mine, and the principle of freedom=
of speech
demands that I not use my government as a club to suppress the=
speech of
others.
=09I realize this might be considered a complex distinction by=
people not from
this country. But it's absolutely fundamental to the=
philosophical principles
on which America was founded. Foreigners sometimes think it's=
nutty.
=09DS
