Yes it would be illegal in Germany, but here in the US we do have freedom of speech. From flag burning, to KKK rallys and in this case Nazi insignia are all examples of free speech, and protected by the Constitution.
Google can censor this but that would also be sacrificing free speech.
I think its a disgusting theme but I don't think it should be censored, maybe they should get their keywords sorted so it doesn't show up when looking up "Jewish".
"Yes it would be illegal in Germany, but here in the US we do have freedom of speech. From flag burning, to KKK rallys and in this case Nazi insignia are all examples of free speech, and protected by the Constitution."
The 1st amendment is about Congress, not about what retailers allow into their stores for sale.
The first 8 amendments are all defined as protecting individual rights: speech, self-defense, home, private property, self-incrimination, fast/juried trials, and torture. The others are defining limits on what Congress / states can do against the other undefined rights.
Even if Google remove it from their marketplace people could still install it directly. So Google can make the choice not to allow bigotry "in their house" without preventing others from having free speech. Which seems like a reasonable compromise to me.
This is a property rights issue. The existance of these applications damages Google's ability to sell Android phones (see Steve Job's mocking of porn in the Android store as a good example). Google has no obligation to support your speech if it damages their property. They have no obligation to support your speech (i.e. pay to progate it, which clearly they are doing here by paying for the servers).
Basically you are saying you have the "right" to force Google into paying to support your hate speech. Bullshit. That has nothing to do with freedom of speech.
here in the US we do have freedom of speech. From flag burning, to KKK rallys and in this case Nazi insignia are all examples of free speech, and protected by the Constitution.
To me, Nazi insignia seems like imagery rather than "speech." If you agree it's imagery, do you think that any imagery should be OK to own and distribute, no matter how offensive it is (as with speech)?
Officially, we have free speech, as stated in the constitution, but the same constitution forbids anonymity (I use to joke I have free speech as long as I have a better lawyer that the folks offended by my free speech). Also, there are laws explicitly forbidding racist and other kinds of hate-speech.
I find this foolish - unpopular ideas will be nurtured, if not in the open, where they can be attacked, far more dangerously, in closed self-reinforcing communities.
Google can censor this but that would also be sacrificing free speech.
I think its a disgusting theme but I don't think it should be censored, maybe they should get their keywords sorted so it doesn't show up when looking up "Jewish".