Should companies be allowed to disassociate themselves from other companies like Parler?

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by TCassa89, Jan 11, 2021.

  1. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    How did Trump incite violence? By telling people to be peaceful and to go home?
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2021
  2. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So the companies banned Trump because they thought that the EO FORCED them to ban Trump?
     
  3. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    by lying to the people and telling them the election was stolen, and they needed to fight

    things like this “you will never take back our country with weakness, you have to be strong”

    why do you try so hard to defend an American President?
     
  4. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump signed the EO, so they became more involved, then Trump incited the violence on the capital and the rest is history

    these corps were scrambling when Trump said he was gonna remove 230 and he signed the EO.... that causes change, if Trump got his way, they needed to be prepared
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2021
  5. TCassa89

    TCassa89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2013
    Messages:
    9,056
    Likes Received:
    3,690
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's referring to content published by a third party, but that doesn't necessarily mean the users themselves cannot get into legal trouble (be it civil or criminal) for what they post online. A user (be it an individual or a company) can still potentially be sued or charged based on what they post online. For example, it is still technically possible for a user to be sued for defamation over what they post on a website like twitter. Note that there are two different kinds of defamation, libel and slander (written and spoken) the latter of which does not require being recognized as a publisher. The website would not be held reliable if the person who posted the content was a third party.

    Another obvious example would be if someone were to use a website like twitter to send a death threat to someone, the user who sent the death threat would be held reliable for the death threat, and not the website. That isn't to say the website has complete immunity in such scenario, but they would only be held reliable under extreme circumstances where it could be proven that the website was aware, and was doing nothing to prevent ongoing criminal activity from taking place.
     
    chris155au likes this.
  6. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What do you suppose would happen to the Twitter account of a conservative outlet which tweeted the day after the Capitol riots, that violence is an important tool?
     
  7. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    trump was not banned for one tweet, it was four years of tweets

    Trump got away with a lot.... should everyone?

    would it be fair to ban someone after one post after letting Trump go for years?

    fire and fury and the lot

    like I said, going forward after Trump's EO, things have changed.... maybe Biden overrides the EO and things change back, but I would guess anytime the white house or Capital is attacked it will get more attention
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2021
  8. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    was looking up AU censorship laws, is that what you want here?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_Australia

    "Internet censorship in Australia is enforced by both the country's criminal law[1][2] as well as voluntarily enacted by internet service providers.[3][4] The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has the power to enforce content restrictions on Internet content hosted within Australia, and maintain a blocklist of overseas websites which is then provided for use in filtering software. The restrictions focus primarily on child pornography, sexual violence, and other illegal activities, compiled as a result of a consumer complaints process."
     
  9. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What do you suppose would happen to the Twitter account of a conservative outlet which tweeted the day after the Capitol riots, that violence is an important tool?
     
  10. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This type of non-speech related censorship isn't in the US? Since when was child porn legal?
     
  11. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    14,562
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Should companies be allowed to disassociate themselves from other companies like Parler?

    Of course. And they are allowed to try to crush their competitors. If they crush them effectively then they can be afoul of the monopoly laws and perhaps other laws. So there are consequences. There are consequences to all actions.
     
  12. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    other illegal activities?

    in America, we go after those sites as they are crimes, not put them on a ban list
     
  13. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,418
    Likes Received:
    51,229
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's the coordination that has caught everyone's interest.

    Many conservatives who have long argued that small-business competition is the best way to moderate the tech oligarchs’ power, recognize that government may now have an interest in making some large companies, such as basic web-hosting platforms, utilities akin to AT&T.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...e_changes_the_free_speech_debate_145038.html#!
    When small businesses can’t even get hosting, what are they supposed to do next? Create their own Internet?
     
  14. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,418
    Likes Received:
    51,229
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So what? Twitter is down over 16% since this year started after they have purged conservatives.

    And how these social media folks lie, lie, and then lie some more.

    DON’T BE EVIL: Google defends its partnership with Facebook, denies states’ claim of anticompetitive advantage.

    The problem is the coordinated slaughter of little parlar by these mega giants.
     
  15. 61falcon

    61falcon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    21,436
    Likes Received:
    12,227
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Parler is being brought back with aid from a Russian company.
     
  16. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,227
    Likes Received:
    16,924
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't see a problem. I know of a guy, who got his own ISP going from his garage, so why can't Parler do the same?

    https://www.technologies.ca/this-man-launched-a-new-internet-service-provider-from-his-garage/
     
  17. TCassa89

    TCassa89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2013
    Messages:
    9,056
    Likes Received:
    3,690
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So what?

    Well that would make any legal case claiming that they are in violation of anti-trust laws a very difficult case to win
     
  18. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,418
    Likes Received:
    51,229
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Parler claims, in it's anti-trust suit against Amazon that they conspired against them because Amazon recently signed a deal to provide web services for Twitter. Twitter was not reprimanded or punished by Amazon for the hashtag #HangMikePence, which was trending the day before Parler's suspension. Parler asserts that Amazon's choice to suspend its hosting was "designed to reduce competition in the microblogging services market to the benefit of Twitter."

    To prevail, Parler must establish that Amazon and Twitter has a shared purpose in driving Parler out of business.
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2021
  19. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    In Australia we do that too. What's your point?
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2021
  20. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Here is the relevant section of Section 230:

    This is what is currently protecting social media companies from liability. So how does it not also protect the user considering that it says "no provider or user?"
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2021
  21. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Except Trump didn't incite the violence on the Capitol. If he did, then you also have to say that Bernie Sanders incited the shooting of the Republicans by the Bernie Sanders supporter.
     
  22. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why do you interpret that as violently fight, and violently strong?
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2021
  23. bigfella

    bigfella Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2016
    Messages:
    7,501
    Likes Received:
    8,667
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Whenever I hear Conservatives talk about withdrawing Section 230 protections they seem to think it will only be withdrawn on the evilliberal companies they don't like, and that somehow the places where they & likeminded souls like to go to complain about minorities & plot violence will just be left to carry on as per usual. It won't take many threats of legal action to effectively shut down a broad swathe of social media & opinion sites, including places like this.
     
  24. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Places like where exactly?

    Why the hell would a mere THREAT of legal action "effectively shut down" anything?
     
  25. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the bigger question is why did the people that stormed the Capital think that?
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2021

Share This Page