Lessons from Italy’s Stand Against Non‑Consensual Imagery
2 Likes
This is not “free speech.” It’s targeted harm.
Italy’s action should inspire other nations to follow suit.
I suspect that this would be fairly controversial in the US. Where exactly does “free speech” end? Have there been any relevant cases regarding non-consensual imagery in the US come before the SCOTUS? Are there any relevant laws in the US that could trigger such a case?
As more general commentary on how fraught this is: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/09/17/politics/supreme-court-precedents-that-targeting-hate-speech-would-violate
1 Like
Speaking of freedom of speech, allow me to paste a screenshot to sort of poke fun at something here:
3 Likes
Arguably, Purism’s website is a service, not a product.
It’s also a free service.
The question has to be asked though as to whether this is built in to Discourse and/or whether Purism has any control over it.
1 Like
Matomo is addressed in Purism’s policies page:
Matomo is not used on this Discourse instance, which is partially why I justified participation in the first place.
2 Likes