Posted on 01/10/2021 11:19:15 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
Parler founder and CEO John Matze said his company is “prepared to take full legal action” after several big tech companies suspended the social media network from their services, according to an email.
John Matze, Parler’s founder, told The Epoch Times in an email that he believes Apple, Google, and Amazon had acted in bad faith and that the social media platform is considering legal action.
Responding to accusations that Parler was enabling “threats of violence and illegal activity,” Matze said these companies are using recent events to “go after Parler,” even though “there is no evidence Parler was used to coordinate the events.”
“Parler has no groups-style feature and Facebook was the number one tool for coordinating meetups for that event,” Matze said.
The targeted moderation by these companies against Parler came after civil unrest and acts of violence marred a largely peaceful protest at the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday. A group of rioters and a minority of protesters waving American and Trump flags illegally stormed the Capitol building as lawmakers were counting electoral votes in a joint session of Congress. The mayhem on the day left five people dead, including one police office, and dozens of officers injured.
In response to the Capitol breach, a number of Silicon Valley technology companies ramped up their policing of statements and comments from President Donald Trump, conservatives, and other voices they believe may cause harm. Twitter on Friday permanently removed Trump’s account on its platform and justified its censorship by saying that the president had violated its “Glorification of Violence Policy” after he posted a message urging protesters to remain peaceful and leave the Capitol. The Trump campaign Twitter account has also been removed.
(Excerpt) Read more at theepochtimes.com ...
Sue them. Restraint of trade.
[One of the problems with an anti-trust suit is that it’s often hard to demonstrate that anyone is actually harmed by one of these monopolies. Competitors to companies like Amazon and Twitter really don’t have any standing to challenge a monopoly because U.S. anti-trust laws are aimed at protecting the interests of CUSTOMERS, not competitors. Fair competition is simply the mechanism for ensuring that customers can get the best value at the lowest price possible.]
Big tech is trying to set up a monopoly and restrict marketplace competition. Don’t know if that would work these days.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/sherman_antitrust_act
Maybe I am off base... but how is this any different than a baker denying service to a same sex wedding?
“I don’t see how this couldn’t fit under antitrust laws.”
—
Antitrust and, as I’ve noted before, a violation of restraint of trade law.
https://www.findlaw.com/smallbusiness/business-laws-and-regulations/restraint-of-trade.html
But I’ve come to believe that conservative folks are just not bright enough to use these laws to their advantage. It would be a shock to me if Parler were any smarter.
Oh well, you can only lead the horse to the water - so, c’est la vie aand all that.
Supreme Court.
The problem is that this “private company” gets huge tax breaks as a public utility. That’s what Section 230 was all about.
Anti-Trust Laws, what are those?
—
Where one client hires a lot of expensive lawyers to battle another client with a host of even more expensive lawyers. After they battle it out, there is a private settlement. Both clients declare victory. All the lawyers buy multi-million dollar vacation homes that are color coordinated with their wives favorite colors in Spring; after that they go on River Cruises around Europe to taste wines and cheeses before returning to the office to take up another Anti-Trust case.
Does that help?
Only leftists have standing now ...
—
and latches to match
I posted something on Facebook about all of this censorship
now I have people coming out of the woodwork that have not spoken too in 10 years liking the comment and commenting that they agree and are going to avoid Silicon valley techs as much as they can
I think they shook the bee hive
Stupid of them from a business sense
“Legal action”
ROFL!
This country no longer has a functioning legal system of equal protection under the law. No rule of law. No legitimate judiciary. It’s the wild west again folks.
“Legal action”
LOL
This country no longer has a functioning legal system of equal protection under the law. No rule of law. No legitimate judiciary. It’s the wild west again folks.
But I thought his lawyers quit him.
Maybe he can get Lin Wood and Sydney Powell. /s
Well we have had FreerRepublic the whole time, thank God and thank Jim.
However in regard to more generalized types of social media platformst they have a strong tendency to become monopolies just by their nature. For example you can not have both MySpace and Facebook thriving at the same time. Within the population of potential customers that might want to use MySpace or Facebook, nobody uses MySpace because nobody uses MySpace, and on the other hand everybody uses Facebook because everybody uses Facebook.
The product that Facebook, Twitter, YouTube etc are selling is not just the technology...it is primarily the people who engage each other using the technology. Without other people there to interact with, all these technologies are not worth much.
The only way any of this would change is if there was an event that made a lot of people leave a platform at once...as may be happening now.
Some companies like Parler, Rumble and such DID develop the technology and now are starting to have more people. How many more people is an interesting question I can't tell the answer to. But they were not going to get much until now.
Does he mean seeking legal action in the same court system that ignored massive voter fraud in this past election? And he thinks he will get a fair trial?
I believe the term is Star Chamber.
JoMa
Parlar will have no standing. The courts refused to hear the evidence for mass election fraud. Who thinks this sill even have a chance. There is no more justice.
I don’t see how this couldn’t fit under antitrust laws.
+++++
You should check with Joe Biden about that.
But seriously, you may have a point. What is happening here is no doubt a violation of the anti-trust laws. But that is a Federal crime and the hance of prosecution is, IMHO, zero.
For me it is an open question as to whether or not anti-trust actions are subject to a civil lawsuit. On that I’m not so sure.
It’s time for FRLawyers to jump in and tell us. You raised a good point and I, for one, would like a definitive answer.
This looks malicious with criminal intent. How about RICO???
Chief Justice John Robert’s, are you proud of what your actions have wrought?
I sympathize with the sentiment. At this moment in time it seems there is no injustice that the Left can not get away with.
However, taking a step back, I do not think this sentiment is necessarily right. American history I think shows that sometimes courts make horrible awful terrible decisions and yet at other times make sound ones.
So I think it possible (as far as I know as a non-lawyer who does not know many particulars that are relevant) that the Parler case may be more successful than recent events might suggest. But I allow that it may fall flat on its face. Will not judge it one way or another until and unless I know more.
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.