Warrant canaries appear to be usable by large US companies - Reddit in this case
Rayzer
Rayzer at riseup.net
Mon Apr 4 11:09:40 PDT 2016
Sean Lynch wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 8:19 AM, Rayzer <Rayzer at riseup.net
> <mailto:Rayzer at riseup.net>> wrote:
>
> Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> > Here and there someone pokes their illogical head up and says
> "Warrant
> > canaries can't work" or "warrant canaries will get you introuble
> with
> > the law" or some variation on the theme. It boggles me fookin marnd,
> > it do. Perhaps this story can help massage some of those mental
> > tensions...
>
> From what I've read the legal department at reddit isn't really sure
> whether it violated the law by killing it's canary.
>
>
> Do we know for sure that Reddit deleted the canary because something
> happened that killed the canary, rather than because their legal
> department decided that the canary was possibly not legal in the first
> place? One would think they would simply say that's why they did it if
> that were the case, but the fact that they didn't say that is the only
> evidence I'm aware of that it's NOT because they decided it was illegal.
That's a good question and would make an interesting (albeit
one-time-only) defense against being accused of tipping peeps by killing
their canary.
--
RR
"Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/testlist/attachments/20160404/94a0200c/attachment.sig>
More information about the Testlist
mailing list