This Is Rumor Control is justifiably outraged by the fact that apparently, the U.S. government has decided that it is acceptable to use evidence obtained through torture against prisoners at Guantanamo Bay:
I guess that makes sense doesn’t it? After all, torture never produces false information or confessions. Right? People never, ever, make up a confession just to bring an end to their own suffering. Right? I mean, didn’t we figure that out back when we were drowning “witches” in Salem, Massachusetts a couple of centuries ago?
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: A vote for George W. Bush was a vote for torture. This is more evidence of that fact.
We may not need to worry about Big Brother taking away our First Amendment rights. Corporate America is doing a good job of doing it for him:
Sony lawyers called Mr. Kottke the day of his post, said the blogger, and told him he was breaking copyright laws. The suits demanded that he take down the audio spoiler. Apparently, though, Sony attorneys made no similar requests of two other media outlets - a national newspaper and an ABC affiliate station - that also let slip the news of Mr. Jennings’s defeat.
Now, not being a legal expert, I cannot comment on the merits of this case. But the fact is, corporations have a disproportionate amount of power in relation to individuals which threatens our free speech rights, especially on the internet. All a corporation needs to do to stop someone from posting something they do not like (whether their claims have merit or not) is sick the suits on them - and that person will be forced to back down or spend tens of thousands of dollars fighting off a frivilous lawsuit.
Apparently, the amount of free speech one is granted in this country is directly proportional to the amount of money one has in one’s bank account. And for most of us, that means - not much.
Where this is really getting out of hand is in the area of personal names. I have recently become aware of a situation (I will not name the particulars in order to protect the person involved) where a blogger was threatened with legal action for HAVING THE SAME NAME as another slightly more famous person. That other person objected to the (I thought) protected political speech expressed on that blog, and used their corporate backers to threaten legal action against this blogger for using their own name.
Clearly, if we have reached a point where deep pocketed individuals with our same name can silence us simply because they disagree with our politics (as opposed to intellectual property reasons), then the First Amendment simply does not apply for most of us.
With this situation in mind, I have decided to remove my full name from this site. From this point forward, I will use only my first name. The disadvantage is that this makes me more anonymous - which no doubt hurts my credibility. But the advantage is that Steve should be generic enough that no one can use “trademark” or “copyright” or any other such nonsense as a wedge to silence my free speech rights. At least, I hope not.
