docs(faq): note jurisdiction varies in the peer-legality entry - #108
Merged
Conversation
The "Is it legal to run a Freenet peer?" entry leaned entirely on U.S. law (DMCA §512's intermediary distinction, an intent-based "automatic vs. knowing" framework). Some jurisdictions impose strict or administrative liability for operating network/P2P software regardless of intent, so that framework could give a reader outside the U.S. false comfort. Flags the DMCA discussion as an illustrative U.S. example rather than a universal rule, and adds a brief, non-alarmist note that legal treatment of network/P2P software varies by country and operators should weigh their own local laws. Deliberately doesn't name specific countries or turn the FAQ into a legal survey. Reviewed by Fable 5 (read-only pass); two of its suggested fixes applied (softened "internet law" to "many legal systems", untangled a stacked-appositive sentence). Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01UMFQxiSpfoUqxrEqQp5JXR
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Problem
The "Is it legal to run a Freenet peer?" entry (merged in #107) leaned entirely on U.S. law — the DMCA §512 intermediary/conduit distinction and an intent-based "automatic vs. knowing" liability framework. A reader in a jurisdiction with strict or administrative liability for operating network/P2P software (i.e. one that doesn't turn on intent the way U.S./EU law tends to) could read the entry and take false comfort that doesn't apply where they live.
Approach
Deliberately does not name specific countries (avoids taking a public political stance or getting any one regime's specifics wrong) and does not turn the FAQ entry into a legal survey.
Testing
hugo --gc --minify— site builds cleanlypython3 scripts/check-links.py --self-testand... hugo-site/public— no broken internal links (222 pages checked)[AI-assisted - Claude]