> In pretrial proceedings, judge Failla cited a ruling that made a distinction between speech that is functional and speech that is expressive – a line of argumentation that the Government is now continuing, claiming that Storm should not be afforded First Amendment protections because his speech actually does something.
> It's a question that is central to Storm's First Amendment defense: can people, or can they not, be held criminally liable for the words they write, even if such words may be misused by bad actors?
> To better grasp the implications of such argumentation for the broader software development space, imagine Linus Torvalds being held accountable for entering into a criminal conspiracy with North Korea because most high-powered computer networks in the world, which likely includes those in North Korea, continue to run on Linux; Google being held accountable for Lazarus hackers who may use Chrome; or WhatsApp being held accountable when criminals use it, as judge Failla pondered herself earlier in the proceedings.
> "The government asks this Court to disregard the expressive conduct identified by Mr. Storm," the defense now states, noting that "this is not how the First Amendment works," as software always performs a function.
Key excerpt:
> In pretrial proceedings, judge Failla cited a ruling that made a distinction between speech that is functional and speech that is expressive – a line of argumentation that the Government is now continuing, claiming that Storm should not be afforded First Amendment protections because his speech actually does something.
> It's a question that is central to Storm's First Amendment defense: can people, or can they not, be held criminally liable for the words they write, even if such words may be misused by bad actors?
> To better grasp the implications of such argumentation for the broader software development space, imagine Linus Torvalds being held accountable for entering into a criminal conspiracy with North Korea because most high-powered computer networks in the world, which likely includes those in North Korea, continue to run on Linux; Google being held accountable for Lazarus hackers who may use Chrome; or WhatsApp being held accountable when criminals use it, as judge Failla pondered herself earlier in the proceedings.
> "The government asks this Court to disregard the expressive conduct identified by Mr. Storm," the defense now states, noting that "this is not how the First Amendment works," as software always performs a function.