cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1997-06-10 - Re: Fraud and free speech

Header Data

From: Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
To: Tim May <cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message Hash: ef3558afe56ada288e7388bf1e0bafe6d7fdf2b1c0f100ed6e6023547327dcfa
Message ID: <v03007852afc32baeb7d6@[207.94.249.152]>
Reply To: <199706082331.SAA10511@mailhub.amaranth.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-06-10 16:21:49 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:21:49 +0800

Raw message

From: Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:21:49 +0800
To: Tim May <cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: Fraud and free speech
In-Reply-To: <199706082331.SAA10511@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <v03007852afc32baeb7d6@[207.94.249.152]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



At 5:27 PM -0700 6/8/97, Tim May wrote:
>(Oh, and it almost goes without saying that the same "lies" William and
>others are so worried about in "commercial" speech happen all the time in
>non-commerical speech. For every example of where commercial speech
>involves lies or fraud, I can find similar or fully equivalent
>non-commercial examples, ranging from lies like "I love you" to get a
>partner into bed to deliberate misstatements to mislead an opponent. Why
>should such "lies" be protected while putatively commercial speech is to be
>subjected to an increasing number of limitations?)

The only justification I can think of off hand is that a presumption of
truth may make for more efficient markets.  On the other hand, it also has
very bad effects when applied to political speech.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

Thread