Posted on 05/04/2019 9:39:38 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
For the love of god, what laws are they getting around? Please explain.
If they become a publisher then the only thing that changes is accountability for libel. Publishers are not forced by the government to publish anything they do not wish to publish.
Freeper are confusing the Constitutional right to be free of government laws restricting speech with some imaginary “right to be heard”. You can say whatever you like but it doesn’t mean anyone has to listen, or publish it for you, or allow it on their privately owned forum.
Global Engagement Center (GEC) has contracts with a number of social medias. I've read that google and twitter is part of this contract. If you want to look it up that is great.
I'm looking for an official paper on the list of "silicon valley" contracts. (US State department term)
If you can find it that would be interesting.
https://www.state.gov/r/gec/index.htm
What constitutes a forum vs a publisher.
Here is a legal forum talking about this is a bias point of view siding with social medias:
https://blogs.findlaw.com/technologist/2018/07/is-facebook-a-public-forum-publisher-or-just-a-platform.html
I personalty lost over $30,000 on this issue which I did contact a lawyer over. He told me contract laws under social media doesn't apply to online services.
In my case I was under the impression to brake the service the company that has the service must first inform of the wrong doing in question. In order to comply with the contract.
Under all other forms of contracts that is true except on line services.
The reason these contracts are different is based on the blurred lines of what they call themselves.
“Shark Tank” was on tv here last night (not my choice) and Mark Cuban and the show itself did a Biden commercial. I’m guessing that won’t go toward his tv time balance since Cuban didn’t say his name but just had a picture of them all together.
“Facebook should remain free to blacklist as much as it wishes.”
I bet you’re still upset that FDR didn’t allow Hitler’s Wehrmacht to drop 50 divisions into Kansas because...freedom of association. Libertarians are lunatics and would allow the United States to fall so that they could pound their puny breasts and scream that they’re constitutional purists.
Congress is not only on their pay-to-play-roll, they are secretly elated. The UniParty hates conservatives and nationalists.
Ha the Hitler ploy that leftist love so to use when they lose an argument based on facts. Do you propose joining forces with Facebook to submit to government enforced censorship? You and Mark and the FCC and the FEC will have fun deciding who does and does not participate.
Facebook is a privately owned company that is used by private individuals all who are free to run their affairs as they see fit.
But I am open minded. Please give me an example of a law. regulation, or government agency that helps promote conservative speech. Please tell me how inviting the government to control social media will help conservatives? Do you believe that once having established control over social media the the government will then be a protected haven offering a loving embrace to conservatives?
You don’t like Facebook now so you think it will be better if Mark gets the government regulation that you both want?
Himmler would love the way you think.
I did. As an example. on-line contract law are not the same ALL other forms of contracts. For the simple reason they don't fall under any category of law by changing their type of service they're providing. As far as the law goes the type they're lobbying for is not applicable to any laws on the books.
I've given three examples. All of them effected me directly.
You come on this board and defend Google and Facebook, like a good, little Soros troll.
You don’t have enough smarts to realize we’re at war. Screw the leftist government agencies that you worship.
Hitler would love the way you think.
Don’t waste your breath on this left-wing, Soros troll. He’s all over this thread defending communists and fascists at Facebook and Google.
Yeah, I have a feeling he is going to come back with “show me the law.” When my argument is there are no laws they follow.
I am the one, unlike you, not going along with Facebook and asking for government regulation. You and Facebook want the same thing. Mark wants the government tom tell him what to do about who gets to post on Facebook. You think having the government enforce accessibility is going to end wel for conservatives? If so you need to study up on the consequences to conservatives that the Fairness doctrine had.
Keep shilling for government intervention. It exposes your leftist mentality.
Do you believe Facebook and all social media should follow the laws everyone else does such as contract laws?
Certainly. But you have yet to produce any laws. Just a lot of hearsay and anecdote. If you believe Facebook is in breach of a contract it has with you please post the contract and explain the breech.
I just said you would say that! LOL!
Again my argument is there are no laws at all against what they're doing. Not even contract law. Everyone else needs to follow laws set down for contracts except social medias.
When you sign up you're required to agree to their terms of service. That is a contract which SHOULD be based on US or international contract laws. They don't.
The way they get around it is claiming there service isn't a platform and not a publisher. Which I posted a link from a law site showing that argument from social media's perspective.
Since they're not a publisher or a platform there are no laws created at all and are at the moment not bound by anything other then what they feel is best for them.
When you agree to their terms of service. They don't need to inform you of any mistake you might have made before closing your account. ALL other contract laws require a notice of compliance before service is closed.
I see you are claiming they have no laws but you want them to follow some other laws you have in mind for them. I believe the whole realm of the US Criminal code applies to them as well as OSHA, EPA, IRS, EEOC, and a few hundred state and local laws. All laws regarding contracts and apply to them. Of they have public stock they have SEC laws. They must comply with banking laws. If they sell goods or device then the FTC laws apply.
They have to follow they same contract law as everyone else. If you have a contract with them and there are is a breech you have all the same rights in law that you would have with any other contract. There is no special contract law for social media. Where do you get that idea they are exempt from contract law.
What are they doing that needs a law?
You can believe all you want. It's not true.
look at Bill Gates. He had a contract with IBM to make DOS.
He took his software and sold it himself. Today that is against the law but at the time got away with it because the laws where not there to stop him from doing it. The laws at the time was that it was his software.
Remember IBM attempted to put him into prison for braking his contract.
very similar issue with these social medias and lack of laws today.
https://thisdayintechhistory.com/11/06/ibm-signs-a-deal-with-the-devil/
https://www.forbes.com/forbes/1997/0707/6001336a.html
Why don’t you try dealing in reality and facts. Do you just make this stuff up on the fly?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.