6 ms·

Twitter thread from Snowden: https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1207624251953549312 https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1207624251953549312 > The government ma

Twitter thread from Snowden: https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1207624251953549312 https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1207624251953549312 > The government may steal a dollar, but it cannot erase the idea that earned it. I wrote this book, Permanent Record, for you, and I hope the government's ruthless desperation to prevent its publication only inspires you read it—and then gift it to another. > The court's ruling is a hack intended to circumvent First Amendment limits on what the gov't can censor. They can't (yet) ban the book, so they ban profit to try and prevent such books from being written in the first place.

hinkley 7y ago
They aren't stealing dollars from the publisher though, right? So the controversy is going to sell more copies, and they'll make a mint on this book. I'm sure he'll just get a huge advance on the next book and most of this will come out in the wash.
- farss 7y ago
  I believe they might go after the publisher in this case, and that Snowden already got a good advance they presumably can't get to while he's in Russia.
wahern 7y ago
The ruling is based on a claim that "Snowden breached several contracts with and fiduciary duties to the United States". The crux here is that Snowden was an employee and contractor. If he didn't have that prior, voluntary relationship, then the government likely wouldn't have any firm ground to stand on. I don't see how you could eliminate such a claim without also eliminating the ability of the government to require and enforce secrecy from private contractors and employees more generally. For example, imagine IRS workers writing a tell-all book about the tax returns of various people. IMO Snowden is a persecuted patriot and should be pardoned for any and all crimes (notwithstanding the legitimacy of some of the alleged crimes). But that doesn't mean the government doesn't have legitimate interests in censuring some forms of information. "Free speech" is a term of art and until very recently in nobody's wildest imagination would it cover the disclosure in the first instance of internal government data by government employees and contractors.
washadjeffmad 7y ago
It seems strange that he didn't release it to the public domain or GPL it right after they announced their intent to seize funds. I guess he's still profiting from other markets?
- yeezul 7y ago
  https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1207628691234316288 https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1207628691234316288 > I don't own the rights—the publisher does—but if you're extremely online, you can find a copy in the usual places.
  - sachdevap 7y ago
    Search for "b ok cc" on Google if people are looking for the book.

hinkley 7y ago

They aren't stealing dollars from the publisher though, right? So the controversy is going to sell more copies, and they'll make a mint on this book. I'm sure he'll just get a huge advance on the next book and most of this will come out in the wash.

farss 7y ago
I believe they might go after the publisher in this case, and that Snowden already got a good advance they presumably can't get to while he's in Russia.

wahern 7y ago

The ruling is based on a claim that "Snowden breached several contracts with and fiduciary duties to the United States". The crux here is that Snowden was an employee and contractor. If he didn't have that prior, voluntary relationship, then the government likely wouldn't have any firm ground to stand on. I don't see how you could eliminate such a claim without also eliminating the ability of the government to require and enforce secrecy from private contractors and employees more generally. For example, imagine IRS workers writing a tell-all book about the tax returns of various people. IMO Snowden is a persecuted patriot and should be pardoned for any and all crimes (notwithstanding the legitimacy of some of the alleged crimes). But that doesn't mean the government doesn't have legitimate interests in censuring some forms of information. "Free speech" is a term of art and until very recently in nobody's wildest imagination would it cover the disclosure in the first instance of internal government data by government employees and contractors.

washadjeffmad 7y ago

It seems strange that he didn't release it to the public domain or GPL it right after they announced their intent to seize funds. I guess he's still profiting from other markets?

yeezul 7y ago
https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1207628691234316288 https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1207628691234316288 > I don't own the rights—the publisher does—but if you're extremely online, you can find a copy in the usual places.
- sachdevap 7y ago
  Search for "b ok cc" on Google if people are looking for the book.