
Mozilla tells DHS: we won't help you censor the Internet - miraj
http://www.boingboing.net/2011/05/05/mozilla-tells-dhs-we.html
======
bgruber
This is exactly why i stopped reading boingboing; there's a tendency to
ascribe meaning to actions that just isn't there. Mozilla said no such thing.
What they said was more like "we won't just do whatever a government agency
tells us to unless legally compelled to do so." I'm pleased Mozilla did this,
but their stance is not the one it's being portrayed as here.

~~~
slouch
I was fairly sure this link introduced no new information on the subject.
Thanks for confirming the suspicion.

------
exit
i'd like to see a movement which clearly places the internet above the
sovereignty of any nation

~~~
fleitz
it's called humanity. The sovereignty of your nation is really only important
to your sovereign. No one else really cares, except insofar as much as your
sovereign can steal money from you and give it to them.

Stop confusing your 'country' with your 'nation state' the two are not
synonymous. Your country is important because it contains people with whom you
share culture, your nation state is a bunch of pieces of paper and lines drawn
on a map, if no one believed in these pieces of paper and lines on maps it
would cease to exist.

The nation state is next on the list of business models that the internet is
going to kill. They aren't going to take it lightly.

~~~
mattmanser
I care. It's little things like not having all my stuff taken from me by armed
thugs and not getting murdered that are important to me.

I guess you value information freedom over basic living conditions huh.

I also like this thing called democracy and freedom of speech, which a bunch
of people, normal everyday people like me, round the world really don't like.
There's a hell of a lot of them.

And even if they do like democracy, they also rather like this totally bizarre
idea to me called religion. In my sovereign state is pretty insignificant. I
can poke fun at it. They makes a lot, billions of people, not very happy. Just
not in my little sovereign state.

It's great being in my country. There's a social state, which a bunch of
American's think is a really bad idea but which I, and a lot of my sovereign
state, happen to think is pretty nifty.

So before you start saying that the sovereignty of your nation is really only
important to your sovereign, take a look at all the people in England who love
being English, France, who love being French, Iranians, who love being
Iranian, Indians, who love being Indian, Chinese, who love being Chinese,
Russians, who love being Russians. You get the idea.

I personally think you and reality are very far divorced in your views of
sovereignty. A lot of people like it.

~~~
fleitz
I'm pretty sure thats the same reasoning Kings and Queens used for thousands
of years to describe all the horrible things that would happen should the
people be put in charge.

Go ask your average cop how many people they arrested for armed robbery and
murder, then ask them how many seat belt tickets they handed out.

~~~
parasubvert
Many horrible things have happened when "the people" WERE put in charge. The
difference with democracy is not that you pick better leaders, it's that the
majority is free to pick the leaders they want. It is arguably as easy to pick
a scoundrel as bloodline was.

~~~
arethuza
If you are referring to events like the Russian Revolution I think it's more
accurate to say that a bunch of thugs who _said_ they were acting for "the
people" got in control (somewhat to their own surprise) and did anything they
deemed necessary to maintain their grip on power - mostly by killing anyone
who could conceivably be an opponent.

~~~
anamax
> If you are referring to events like the Russian Revolution I think it's more
> accurate to say that a bunch of thugs who said they were acting for "the
> people" got in control

And this time things are going to be different because ....?

A huge fraction, if not most, revolutions end badly.

~~~
beedogs
Badly for whom?

~~~
anamax
"The people". They get lower living standards, more political oppression, and
bad art.

It's almost like revolutions are intended to demonstrate that "it can't get
worse" is horribly wrong.

------
jarin
Hats off to Mozilla for discovering that dealing with DHS is exactly like
dealing with Righthaven and the RIAA.

------
eloisius
Supposing they comply with the subsequent court order, what's to prevent the
10 variations that will pop up to replace it? This would surely only
proliferate add-ons with the exact same functionality.

------
pmh
Previous discussion on the original blog post:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2518075>

------
ltamake
Mozilla just went up in my book.

~~~
trafficlight
What have they ever done that's been harmful to you?

~~~
PetrolMan
I don't think Itamake meant they had done something wrong necessarily. There
is always room for a company to gain esteem...

------
Dilpil
Wait a minute- DHS? As in, department of homeland security? Why are they
involved in this even?

~~~
lotharbot
DHS absorbed the Customs department, which has power to deal with issues
surrounding counterfeit goods. The domains DHS has been taking down have
redistributed digital content without license/permission, which DHS considers
to be a form of counterfeiting.

(Not saying they're right, just explaining why they're involved.)

------
lurchpop
A major reason to support Mozilla over Google (Chrome) who've gotten way too
cozy with the gov over the past few years.

------
maeon3
Close that car hood citizen, there are secrets in there, don't make me taze
you.

~~~
fleitz
Ihre papier bitte.

