“We have an opportunity here to make the courts, as these cases wind their way up, understand privacy issues, emerging tech issues, against the backdrop of civil rights and through the prism of free information… DDoS is absolutely speech, it should absolutely be recognized as such, protected as such, and the law should be changed… The government and people who write about tech tend to call it a "DDoS attack" but in certain circumstances it's not a DDoS attack, but a DDoS protest. So the law should be narrowly drawn and what needs to be excised from that are the legitimate protests. It's really easy to tell legitimate protests, I think, and we should be broadly defining legitimate protests… I don't have to like or agree with the people that I represent to represent them. I have represented neo-Nazis and I'm Jewish… Everyone is entitled to a defense and the more reprehensible they are and maybe the more guilty they seem at the beginning of the case makes them more entitled to a vigorous and hard-hitting defense. So I don't necessarily know that there's someone I wouldn't represent based upon what they did or based upon their politics… People who cooperate, throw someone else into harm's way so they can soften the blow on themselves, I tend not to represent.”

— Jay Leiderman

As mentioned in the Atlantic interview http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/10/hacktivists-advocate-meet-the-lawyer-who-defends-anonymous/263202/

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "We have an opportunity here to make the courts, as these cases wind their way up, understand privacy issues, emerging t…" by Jay Leiderman?

Jay Leiderman 26

lawyer 1971

Related quotes

“There’s no such thing as a DDoS [distributed denial of service] ‘attack’,” Leiderman said. “A DDoS is a protest, it’s a digital sit it. It is no different than physically occupying a space. It’s not a crime, it’s speech.”

Jay Leiderman (1971) lawyer

As stated in, DDOS Attacks and Protest Speech. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/idealab/homeless-hacker-lawyer-ddos-isn-t-an-attack-it-s-a-digital-sit-in
Variant: There’s no such thing as a DDoS [distributed denial of service] ‘attack’,” Leiderman said. “A DDoS is a protest, it’s a digital sit it. It is no different than physically occupying a space. It’s not a crime, it’s speech.

“I support freedom of expression, no matter whose, so I oppose DDoS attacks regardless of their target… they're the poison gas of cyberspace.”

John Perry Barlow (1947–2018) American poet and essayist

As quoted in "Analysis: WikiLeaks battle: a new amateur face of cyber war?" at Reuters (9 December 2010) http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/09/us-wikileaks-cyberwarfare-amateur-idUSTRE6B81K520101209

“There doesn’t seem to be any law that’s there to protect the citizens from massive State surveillance. We have to collectively come up with some fundamental values around people’s right to privacy, the right to be left alone from government, and rights to free speech.”

Heather Brooke (1970) American journalist

International Journalism Festival http://www.journalismfestival.com/news/heather-brooke-antitrust-legislation-needed-to-keep-the-internet-free/ Interview with Fabio Chiusi, 12 April 2012.
Attributed, In the Media

“I think fully accepting that things are not the way they need to be, and going to work on those issues in a way that people understand you are serious about, as opposed to the tech industry generally appearing arrogant, I understand that.”

Steve Ballmer (1956) American businessman who was the chief executive officer of Microsoft

Business Insider: "Former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer has advice for Facebook and Google: Don't make the mistake we did" http://www.businessinsider.com/ex-microsoft-ceo-steve-baller-tech-industry-work-with-regulators-2018-6?r=UK&IR=T (23 June 2018)
2010s

“When we have something we feel strongly about — and in this case it is civil liberties and freedom and what this nation was founded upon, that we should do something to implement international law — and it is international law now, the right to leave a country freely and return freely — that we should put that issue of principle on the table knowing that the Russians are not going to agree to it.”

Henry M. Jackson (1912–1983) American politician

(1974, opposing détente) " CNN Cold War http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/16/script.html", Episode 16: Détente, Episode Script. Retrieved June 2, 2006.

“I also am concerned about judges who imagine they see everything in society addressed in the Constitution. It is worth remembering that the Constitution is a very brief document. It defines the structure and authority of the federal government and protects a limited list of sacred rights. It does not, and was never intended to, address every legal issue that might arise in our nation’s history. Democracy is well-served when the Court says, in effect, "the Constitution simply does not comment on this issue." In contrast, constitutionalizing an issue takes it out of the democratic process. If the people disagree with a court decision based on the law, they have a remedy in the political process. Through their elected representatives, they can change the law. But once a court declares a law to be unconstitutional or prohibits some agency action on constitutional grounds, it is limiting the options of the people. Such a step should be taken only where it is clear that the Constitution has truly spoken on the issue and forbidden what the political branches have determined to do.”

Alberto Gonzales (1955) 80th United States Attorney General

Speech to American Enterprise Institute (January 17, 2007)

“It is far more important the law should be administered with absolute integrity, than that in this case or in that the law should be a good law or a bad one.”

John Coleridge, 1st Baron Coleridge (1820–1894) British lawyer, judge and Liberal politician

1 Cababe & Ellis' Q. B. D. Rep. 134.
Reg. v. Ramsey (1883)

“We consider this case against the background of a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.”

William J. Brennan (1906–1997) American judge

Writing for the court, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964).

“There's a right of self-defense here that's involved: We know the government has to respond, so we will not be subjected to these types of attacks in the future. But the response should be measured, restrained as much as possible, to protect innocent civilians. It should not just be military. We should pursue diplomatic ways, legal ways, any other ways we can address that.”

Joseph Fiorenza (1931–2022) US Roman Catholic archbishop

Source: Bishops Write Bush to Back U.S. Efforts https://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/21/us/a-nation-challenged-support-from-churches-bishops-write-bush-to-back-us-efforts.html (21 September 2001)

“We have people coming in by the millions…Am I absolutely opposed to immigration? No…We have to find a way to believe in the rule of law, believe in border control and at the same time, not villify the issue.”

Rand Paul (1963) American politician, ophthalmologist, and United States Senator from Kentucky

Speaking in Paducah, 2009-05-09
Rand Paul set to launch Senate campaign
KY Wordsmith
http://kywordsmith.com/#/rand-paul-issues/4533680792
2010-11-17
2000s

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Jay Leiderman 26

Related quotes

Related topics