- “Congress is on the cusp of gutting Section 230. This is the threat we’ve always knew was coming” [Eric Goldman, R Street Institute/TechFreedom letter, Emma Llansó/CDT on SESTA, Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act]
- Psychiatrist sues to unmask author of 1-star review that caused him “extreme and constant distress” [Post and Courier]
- Judge: Loudoun County, Va. public official violated constituent’s rights by blocking him from “Chair Randall” Facebook page [Sydney Kashiwagi, Loudoun Times, Eugene Volokh, earlier on asserted First Amendment right not to be blocked or deleted on officials’ accounts]
- “Ominous: Canadian Court Orders Google To Remove Search Results Globally” [Daphne Keller/CIS via Volokh, EFF; decision defended by Neil Turkewitz, Truth on the Market]
- “Washington law bans repeated online posts intended to ‘embarrass’ anyone” [Eugene Volokh and second post on Rynearson/Moriwaki dispute]
- Blasphemy laws: Taimoor Raza becomes first person sentenced to death in Pakistan over Facebook posts [CNN]
Filed under: Facebook, free speech in Canada, social media, Washington state
3 Comments
“Washington law bans repeated online posts intended to ‘embarrass’ anyone”
From the television show HeeHaw: “…you’ll never hear one of us repeating gossip!
So you’d better be sure and listen close the first time.”
How does a Canadian court propose to enforce its order outside of Canada?
Google has a presence in Canada, and if they don’t comply then presumably they could be found in contempt. The Canadian courts couldn’t come after Google’s US assets, but they could come after any of their Canadian assets.