Re: End of all Open Source.
From: Bill Unruh (unruh_at_string.physics.ubc.ca)
Date: 11/27/03
- Previous message: Dave Korn: "Re: [OT] Port6346 traffic"
- In reply to: n1pop_at_hotmail.com: "Re: End of all Open Source."
- Next in thread: n1pop_at_hotmail.com: "Re: End of all Open Source."
- Reply: n1pop_at_hotmail.com: "Re: End of all Open Source."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 17:25:19 +0000 (UTC)
n1pop@hotmail.com writes:
]unruh@string.physics.ubc.ca (Bill Unruh) wrote in message news:<bpten0$omc$1@string.physics.ubc.ca>...
]> Free speech where the speech itself attracts punishment, for whatever
]> reason, is not free. And the USA for example does not have unrestricted
]> free speech. There are limits to free speech, but the US
]> Supreme court has outlined tests that those limits should obey. The
]> govenment must make an overwhelming case that those limits are necessary
]> to prevent immediate and serious harm.
]But even "free speech" is not a right in the U.S. According to our
]Consititution, the First Ammendment to the Bill of Rights says (among
]other things) there will be no law abridging the freedom of speech.
]So, I have the right to post this message, but I don't have the right
]to incite panic or a riot.
Sorry, in what sense is "free speech" not a right, if the consitution
states tha no law abridging it is allowed?
And the supreme court has stated that it is possible for Congress to
pass laws which do abridge the freedom of speech, but they must be
specific and in answer to an immediate and actual harm. Thus treason
laws are valid. Flag burning laws are not.
- Previous message: Dave Korn: "Re: [OT] Port6346 traffic"
- In reply to: n1pop_at_hotmail.com: "Re: End of all Open Source."
- Next in thread: n1pop_at_hotmail.com: "Re: End of all Open Source."
- Reply: n1pop_at_hotmail.com: "Re: End of all Open Source."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
