The very fact that the banks have the cojones to ask for anything is astonishing, let alone ask for 1st amendment rights to be stripped to support an extremely misguided interpretation of our ineffective and draconian copyright law.
Let’s hope the courts refuse to allow such an inane interpretation.
Isn’t it preposterous to allege that a service cannot provide instantaneous re-transmission of information to subscribed clients? This is no different than legal or medical researchers use.
In fact, this is probably a case where the Freedom of Information Act could be called into play since these banks accepted government funding. Free and immediate disclosure comes with that investment / bailout funding. This is not a national security item so it gets no protection under that law either and shouldn’t under their interpretation of First Amendment.
“Can the government tell a news agency to not print news?”
Of course the government can, they have guns and they will use them against you if you do something they don’t like or if you don’t give them your property. Any questions?
Likely will prove to be a case of who has the lobbyists and who has the money to spend on lots of lawyers to keep it in the legal system. Banks win on both counts. That’s the nature of Wall Street business activites. Constitution be damned.
Isn’t this a hit on free speech? Can the government tell a news agency to not print news? Hmmmm…..
The very fact that the banks have the cojones to ask for anything is astonishing, let alone ask for 1st amendment rights to be stripped to support an extremely misguided interpretation of our ineffective and draconian copyright law.
Let’s hope the courts refuse to allow such an inane interpretation.
Isn’t it preposterous to allege that a service cannot provide instantaneous re-transmission of information to subscribed clients? This is no different than legal or medical researchers use.
In fact, this is probably a case where the Freedom of Information Act could be called into play since these banks accepted government funding. Free and immediate disclosure comes with that investment / bailout funding. This is not a national security item so it gets no protection under that law either and shouldn’t under their interpretation of First Amendment.
“Can the government tell a news agency to not print news?”
Of course the government can, they have guns and they will use them against you if you do something they don’t like or if you don’t give them your property. Any questions?
Likely will prove to be a case of who has the lobbyists and who has the money to spend on lots of lawyers to keep it in the legal system. Banks win on both counts. That’s the nature of Wall Street business activites. Constitution be damned.