The United States has a threat intelligence system with patterns of malicious activity including malware and cyber attacks.<p>This threat intelligence system is also used to specify patterns of foreign propaganda. However, similar to the story above, patterns that are too broad can silence legitimate speech by citizens.<p>An example of this is stopfasttrack.com. Their domain name was similar to Russian propaganda, so then the switch was flipped to censor the Russian domain from Facebook, Twitter and popular email providers, their site was caught in the net as well.<p>They posted to Reddit about it.<p><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/duplicates/38pmg8/hey_reddit_someone_is_trying_really_hard_to_erase/" rel="nofollow">https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/duplicates/38pmg8/hey_re...</a><p>(The US government and NATO use the terms 'troll' and 'spam' as synonyms for foreign online propaganda)
Any lawyers help me out here - if there is a legitimate concern of censorship of parties that clearly shouldn't be affected - and CloudFlare refused to comply - wouldn't someone have to take them to court where they could argue their case?