THREAD: In addition to the drastic restrictions it places on a woman’s reproductive and medical care rights, the new Texas abortion law, SB8, will have devastating effects on online speech. eff.org/deeplinks/2021…
The law will create anti-choice trolls: a class of lawyers and plaintiffs dedicated to using the courts to extort money from a wide variety of speakers supporting abortion rights.
SB8 is a “bounty law”: it doesn’t just allow these lawsuits, it provides a significant financial incentive to file them. It is an attack on many fundamental rights, including the First Amendment rights to advocate for abortion rights and to provide basic educational information.
Those providing educational resources, identifying locations of clinics, arranging rides and escorts, fundraising to support reproductive rights, or simply encouraging women to consider all their options—now have to consider the risk that they might be sued for speaking.
The law is an attack on many fundamental rights, including the First Amendment rights to advocate for abortion rights, to provide basic educational information, and to counsel those considering reproductive decisions.
We will keep a close eye on the lawsuits the law spurs and the chilling effects that accompany them. If you experience such censorship, please contact info@eff.org. eff.org/deeplinks/2021…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Ecuador: @LaPosta_Ecu ’s investigation about open source developer Ola Bini’s case unveils key political interests and implications entangled in his criminal prosecution.
According to the investigation, the Swedish-born developer’s detention in Quito’s airport in 2019 as a “Russian hacker” was a government response to the leak of the “INA papers,” a corruption scandal involving former President Lenin Moreno. 2/6
Four different sources confirmed attending a meeting where high-ranking government officials were informed, before his detention and prosecution, that Ola Bini was not the leak’s suspect they were looking for. 3/6
Canada's proposed online censorship proposal may be the worst yet in a growing pile of bad regimes. The potential harms are vast, especially since much of the details are left open to government and regulatory interpretation. 1/ eff.org/deeplinks/2021…
@EFF Canadian platforms could be forced to rely on automated filters to monitor all posts on their platforms for "harmful" content. Users caught up in these sweeps could end up on file with the local cops—or with Canada’s national security agencies. 2/ eff.org/deeplinks/2021…
@EFF Private communications are excluded from the Canadian proposal, but that is cold comfort—the Canadian government will be able to follow the examples of other countries and declare that encrypted chat groups of various sizes are not ‘private.’ 3/ eff.org/deeplinks/2020…
The Canadian government is planning to implement new dangerous content moderation rules -- and a new speech czar with broad powers to enforce them. eff.org/deeplinks/2021…
@EFF Platforms will likely be forced to rely on automated filters to assess and discover "harmful" content on their platforms, and users caught up in these sweeps could end up on file with the local cops—or with Canada’s national security agencies. eff.org/deeplinks/2021…
@EFF This is dangerous for everyone, but especially marginalized groups. Faced with expansive and vague moderation obligations, little time for analysis, and major legal consequences if they guess wrong, companies inevitably over censor—and users pay the price.
EFF opposes an amendment to the cryptocurrency provision of the infrastructure bill by Sens. Warner & Portman. It fails to protect software developers & is not technologically neutral. We urge Congress to pass Wyden-Lummis-Toomey amendment instead: eff.org/deeplinks/2021… (1/8)
New cryptocurrency regulations should not reach those who merely write and publish code. Nor should they give preference to any current technology over others. The amendment offered by Sens. Warner & Portman fails both of these core principles. eff.org/deeplinks/2021… (2/8)
Sens. Warner & Portman’s amendment only carves out proof-of-work miners and those creating software or hardware wallets so that users can manage their own cryptocurrency. (3/8)
Here are 6 reasons we hate the new cryptocurrency surveillance provision buried in Biden's infrastructure bill:
#1 It will require new surveillance of everyday users of cryptocurrency.
#2 It could force software creators and others who do not custody cryptocurrency for their users to implement cumbersome surveillance systems or stop offering services in the United States.