Legality of warrant canaries

[Sampo Syreeni]

On 2014-10-17, Griffin Boyce wrote:

> Back in 2012, I talked to my attorney about setting up a warrant 
> canary or a dead man's switch -- which he pointed out would have the 
> same legal repercussions as just releasing the gagged warrant/NSL. 
> Why?  Because they are frequently phrased in such a way that if you do 
> or fail to do a thing to somehow make it known, then you've violated 
> the order.

Isn't the whole point that "they" will always phrase this sort of thing 
to an individual's disadvantage, against the constitution and human 
rights, and that then the only way to fight such tyranny without killing 
yourself and/or embarrasing them is to have a popular standpoint and/or 
enough of an extant legal fund. I mean, obviously not to defend 
yourself, because you can never succeed in that, but in order to make 
you an unattractive target to begin with? Mutual assurance of 
destruction, and all that.
-- 
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - decoy at iki.fi, http://decoy.iki.fi/front
+358-40-3255353, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2