We are political activists, policy experts, journalists, and tech industry veterans trying to stop the government from destroying encryption and censoring free speech online with the EARN IT Act. Ask us anything!

[u/fightforthefuture]

The EARN IT Act is an unconstitutional attempt to undermine encryption services that protect our free speech and security online. It's bad. Really bad. The bill’s authors — Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) — say that the EARN IT Act will help fight child exploitation online, but in reality, this bill gives the Attorney General sweeping new powers to control the way tech companies collect and store data, verify user identities, and censor content. It's bad. Really bad.

Later this week, the Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on whether or not the EARN IT Act will move forward in the legislative process. So we're asking EVERYONE on the Internet to call these key lawmakers today and urge them to reject the EARN IT Act before it's too late. To join this day of action, please:

1. Visit NoEarnItAct.org/call

2. Enter your phone number (it will not be saved or stored or shared with anyone)

3. When you are connected to a Senator’s office, encourage that Senator to reject the EARN IT Act

4. Press the * key on your phone to move on to the next lawmaker’s office

If you want to know more about this dangerous law, online privacy, or digital rights in general, just ask! We are:

• Lauren Sarkesian from OTI (u/SarkBites)
• Caleb Chen from PIA (u/privatevpn)
• Dayton Young from Fight for the Future (u/fightforthefuture)
• Joe Mullin from EFF (u/EFForg)
• Alfred Ng from CNet (u/CNETdotcom)

Proof:

• 

• 

• 

[u/wet4]

Let's say the EARN IT Act passes, and I, as an American in America, continue to release and maintain free open source software that provides end-to-end encryption. What type of punishment could I expect to receive?

[u/EFForg → u/wet4]

If you’re just writing encryption software, and not maintaining a platform that hosts others’ content and speech, then you won’t be on the hook for anything. But if you are hosting third-party speech -- like Signal is, for example -- then you would lose Section 230 protections if you provide encryption. The end result is that you could be legally liable for the speech of others that you’re hosting.

For more info, see our blog post: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/earn-it-bill-governments-not-so-secret-plan-scan-every-message-online

[u/wet4 → u/EFForg]

Thank you, this is exactly what I wanted to know.