[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations

Sebastian G. <bastik.tor> wrote:
> Andrew wrote:
>>  - Looked into legality of receiving a large financial donation from a
>> country on the US Treasury embargoed list. Unsurprisingly, we cannot
>> accept such a donation due to the source.
> Money is speech, isn't it? It's just a promise.* If that is true, then
> preventing you from taking money is a violation of your first amendment.

  Well, sort of.  In campaign finance law, "money is speech," but
America hasn't quite figured out how these laws complement or conflict.
 And there's a standing list of embargoed countries.[1]  It's an
incredibly tricky legal area.

(I've ~really~ got to start reading tor-reports more often) [3]

> Money is money; independent from the source.

  Money (especially donations to non-profits) are perceived to have
politics attached to it.  After Hurricane Katrina, there was a bit of an
uproar after Kuwait offered to donate $400m in oil and $100m in actual
money.  My (limited) understanding is that Country X can use good deeds
like those to try to rehabilitate their image, or use it to insinuate a
political tie between themselves and the US.  With some countries, these
sanctions go away after a while, but with others it's a difficult
situation long-term.  Imagine if, to choose a totally random example,
North Korea decided to give a billion dollars to anti-poverty charities
while its people go hungry.  Or if Lukashenko gave a few million to
lobby for journalistic protections in the US while having an awful
record domestically.[2]


[2] https://www.cpj.org/europe/belarus/
[3] that awkward moment when you're reading someone's funder report and
it has your name in it. surprise!
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to