And there's no point for her doing so: people who would do it will do so anyway, and she's better equipped to use her power to prevent the actual leaks than forcing a legal case that would be hard to uphold and harder still to enforce through.Īnd, if it were illegal? There'd be no need for NDAs. But they probably wouldn't survive a challenge in court. Now, a number of.questionable.things are canon in Worm, so it's possible that such laws have been passed or even just issued as executive regulations by the PRT without any authority other than their say-so. (Again, this is usually done as part of the process of learning such information in the first place, or at least being placed in a position of trust where learning such info could come about.) Without an explicit exhortation to do violence to the Ward or Protectorate Hero(ine) in question, no laws can stop somebody who's figured it out from sharing.unless they signed documentation saying they wouldn't. The most closely-guarded, highest-sensitivity thing in the world could be broadcast publically by any reporter or facebook poster or joker with a twitter account, and unless he'd signed over his right to share that information (usually as part of getting permission to have it in the first place), nothing legal could be done to him for it.
That is: it's never illegal for somebody to reveal information unless they've agreed to something making it illegal. While, yes, there wherein some would say the BoR has been ignored, altered, or abused even by the Supreme Court, the First Amendment's most famous application (freedom of speech) precludes anything resembling an Official Secrets Act. Click to shrink.I have to guess this hasn't really been tried in court, or that the USA in this setting has taken a far bleaker path wrt the Bill of Rights than the real world.
0 kommentar(er)
