Edward J. Huff wrote:

That is up to each node operator.  Failure to block some content -- like
mp3's -- is a lot less serious than failure to block other content --
like kp.  The node operator might decide to take the risk in the name of
civil disobedience for some content but not other.

Associating freenet to civil disobedience (in the node op's jurisdiction) is a sure way of bringing it down; it then becomes illegal by self-imposed definition. Censorship is jurisdiction-bound and so is the system's reaction to civil disobedience. When you, as a US-based op, agree to censor kiddie porn and can get away for mp3s go through, you can trust that your Chinese peer will rot in jail if he lets reports from Tienanmen go through. The Chinese equivalent to your kiddie porn censorship is censoring Tienanmen and letting the mp3s through. Well, pretty worthless I'd say.

Don't touch content. Don't make it possible to touch any
content. When you do, you burn all content as well as


-- Framtiden Ãr som en babianrÃv, fÃrggrann och full av skit. Arne Anka _______________________________________________ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to