May I ask why FB, Twitter, etc. get protection from liability from 3rd party content under Section 230 of the Communications Act but these folks don’t? They both have a TOS and reserve the right to refuse service.
Capitalist business vs. anti-capitalist activism. What’s happening is repression by a capitalist state against antifascist organisation, nobody cares about laws.
The antifascist structures can’t effectively work inside the rules of a system designed by and for capitalists and the law (in this case) does not exactly include foreign structures. The US (and its corpos) does all kinds of unlawful things outside of its borders, if you haven’t noticed. However, the law shields domestic corporations from foreign laws, as they are usually headquartered in the US and only need to adhere to US law as this is only applied domestically.
So they have a TOS like Facebook or any other large platform, and reserve the right to refuse service?
Unless they’re knowingly doing business with a known convicted terrorist, I fail to see how this makes them a terrorist support platform.
Yeah. I’m not suggesting TOS indicates guilt, but just the “I can’t control my users” argument is void.
May I ask why FB, Twitter, etc. get protection from liability from 3rd party content under Section 230 of the Communications Act but these folks don’t? They both have a TOS and reserve the right to refuse service.
Capitalist business vs. anti-capitalist activism. What’s happening is repression by a capitalist state against antifascist organisation, nobody cares about laws.
The antifascist structures can’t effectively work inside the rules of a system designed by and for capitalists and the law (in this case) does not exactly include foreign structures. The US (and its corpos) does all kinds of unlawful things outside of its borders, if you haven’t noticed. However, the law shields domestic corporations from foreign laws, as they are usually headquartered in the US and only need to adhere to US law as this is only applied domestically.
Epstein ring communicated a lot through Gmail for years and they still never went after those involved nor Google
@[email protected] how would you explain Google still not being sanctioned based on your logic?
They can’t control their users once provisioning them. Once again, this is not different than any local restaurant.