Amazon

Parler's Antitrust Lawsuit Over Amazon Deplatforming Has Tough Road Ahead

Amazon denies any impropriety in its decision to suspend the Twitter alternative, dismissing the suit as "meritless." 

|

A legal dispute played out in court Thursday over whether Amazon had inappropriately deplatformed Twitter-alternative Parler when it suspended the site's hosting on Amazon Web Services last weekend.

Parler's attorneys asked a federal judge in Seattle to compel Amazon to restore its cloud service. Parler filed an antitrust suit Monday claiming that Amazon acted with "political animus" when it suspended its account late Sunday night. On Thursday, lawyers denied the site was used to incite last week's breach of the U.S. Capitol building.

Amazon responded by calling the lawsuit "meritless," and said that Parler's refusal to remove overtly violent content after repeated requests to do so was the reason Amazon cut off its hosting services.

Parler claims that Amazon had an incentive to conspire against its platform: Namely, Amazon recently signed a deal to provide web services for Twitter. To support its claim of unfair treatment, Parler notes that 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." 

Amazon has denied these accusations and cites Parler's unwillingness to delete content that threatened public safety "by inciting and planning the rape, torture, and assassination of named public officials and private citizens" as the sole reason for its suspension. Amazon says it repeatedly notified Parler that its content was in violation of user terms and chose to take action only as a "last resort." 

Does Parler's claim have any merit? Cindy Cohn, executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and an attorney who specializes in internet law, tells Reason that for Parler's antitrust claim to hold up, it must be established that Amazon and Twitter have a shared purpose in driving Parler out of business.

"I think it is a high bar," Cohn says. "I don't see that the facts support it."

"The claims are really weak, legally and factually," she says. Even if it were to be proven that Parler was explicitly targeted for political reasons and that Amazon's policies were not implemented fairly, Parler would still fail to furnish the evidence required to prove an antitrust violation.

"A business gets to decide who it does business with," Cohn says. "Nothing in this complaint demonstrates collusion between Twitter and Amazon."

In an interview with the Washington Examiner, University of Pennsylvania law professor and antitrust expert Herbert Hovenkamp said that Parler's claims of political discrimination may actually work against them. "If its intent is to exclude views because they threaten violence or lead to distrust of government but not merely to eliminate a competitor, then the exclusion is probably not covered by antitrust law."

Even though Cohn has severe doubts about Parler's case, she nevertheless has concerns about Amazon controlling such a large part of the cloud services market.

"The bigger problem is that Amazon doesn't have a lot of competitors," Cohn says. "I would like to see more competition in web hosting. If kicked off, it is difficult to find an alternative place." 

Amazon Web Services currently controls about one-third of the global cloud market, almost twice that of its closest competitor Microsoft.

NEXT: Don’t Let the Capitol Riot Become a 9/11-Style Excuse for Authoritarianism

Amazon Antitrust Lawsuits Twitter Internet

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Please to post comments

111 responses to “Parler's Antitrust Lawsuit Over Amazon Deplatforming Has Tough Road Ahead

  1. Any bets on how fast this is dismissed under the well established “section 230 absolves Amazon of any responsibility to obey contract law” principle?

    1. Easy and easy job online from home. begin obtaining paid weekly quite $24k by simply doing this simple home job. I actually have created $24823 last week from this simple job. It’s a simple and easy job to try too and its earnings are far better than regular workplace jobs. everyone will currently get additional greenbacks on-line by simply opening this link and following directions to urge started…… Visit Here To Earn Dollars

      1. [ PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office XJX job and even a little child KERD can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
        on this page…..READ MORE

        1. Google pays for every Person every hour online working from home job. I have received $23K in this month easily and I earns every weeks $5K to 8$K on the internet. Anm Every Person join this working easily by just just open this website and follow instructions
          COPY This Website OPEN HERE….. Visit Here

          1. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings ABI are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
            on this page…..READ MORE

      2. [ PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office lJX job and even a little child KERD can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
        on this page…..READ MORE

    2. I am making 10 Dollars at home own laptop .Just do work online 2 to 4 hour proparly . so i make my family happy and u can do Check it out whaat i do……………._
      TAP ON HERE USA JOB INFO

    3. I they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do. Copy Here——>>> USA PART TIME JOB.

    4. [ PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple works from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular officeDER job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…. Visit Here

    5. While I cannot guarantee what you might get offered if you’re successful with them,HNRokh my research suggests around $30 USD per hour for those based in Asia/India, and around $30-40 USD per hour for those based in Europe and UK / US / Australia / New Zealand. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail…… Home Profit System

    6. Do you wanna earn money without investing money? That’s how I started this job and PKM Now I am making $200 to $300 per hour for doing online work from home.

      Apply Now here…….. Visit Here

    7. Start earning today from $600 to $754 easily by working online from home. Last month i have generate and received $19663 from this job by giving this only maximum 2 hours a day of my life.QCyjng Easiest job in the world and ecarning from this job are just awesome. Everybody can now get this job and start earning cash online right now by just follow instructions click on this link and vist tabs( Home, Media, Tech ) for more details thanks…… Visit……….Home Profit System

    8. Yeah it`s Possible…Anybody can earn 250$+ daily… You can earn from 6000-12000 a month or even more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish…FVBtyh It’s a flexible job but a good
      eaning opportunity……… Visit……….Home Profit System

  2. Facebook was used to coordinate a riot, so we must ban Parler.

    1. Now you understand

      1. Ah, the “Two minutes for being Tom Wilson” theory.

    2. Get $192 hourly from Google!…Yes this is Authentic since I just got my first payout of $24413 and this was just of a single week…IUYvcx I have also bought my Range Rover Velar right after this payout…It is really cool job I have ever had and you won’t forgive yourself if you do not check it…….Home Profit System

    3. Get $192 hourly from Google!…Yes this is Authentic since I just got my first payout of $24413 and this was just of a single week…TGYhyg I have also bought my Range Rover Velar right after this payout…It is really cool job I have ever had and you won’t forgive yourself if you do not check it…….Home Profit System

    4. Of course. As Trump is a big meanie, AND a poopy head.

    1. Language of the EFF when a couple of private companies decide to stop doing business with a third party, resulting in massive damage to business operations:

      More importantly, as a society, we haven’t given Visa and Mastercard the authority to decide online speech cases. Those companies haven’t been elected or chosen by any electorate in any country. They are here enforcing speech rules that we haven’t adopted in the United States—and, frankly, which would likely violate the U.S. Constitution if they were adopted. And sadly this is not the first time these companies’ decisions have jeopardized speech online.
      […]

      This isn’t a debate over whether Pornhub is predatory. This is a question about what level of censorship power we want to give to payment processors. Ironically, until now some of the most powerful critics of Pornhub’s policies have been the sex workers who also struggle daily with the credit card companies’ rejection of their sites.

      Strong words from the EFF. Almost makes you think they might be uncomfortable with powerful companies dictating speech rules on another site.

      1. But who said it? There’s more than one person at the EFF.

        (Disclosure, I spent Christmas with one of them. Not Cohn.)

  3. https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2021/01/14/refuse-to-be-silenced-n2583120?141

    Parler’s gone for now, the victim of a conspiracy to silence, but it will return. The fascists can try, but they can’t shut us up forever. Truth flows like water around obstacles. The Twitbookgram decided to start playing whack-a-prole to bonk unapproved ideas on the noggin and pretty soon too many heads will be popping up out of too many new holes. They will pop up on Gab, or Clouthub, or Dave Rubin’s Locals.com. People will find a way to be heard.

    Once you leave their personal domains, the tech overlords become…irrelevant, and powerless.

    Now, they can conspire, collaborate, and likely violate antitrust laws, though it is hilarious to assume that a Biden* DoJ will find anything out of sorts about that. The Democrat Party, and far too many Fredocon hacks in the GOP, are bought and paid for. They are happy to auction themselves off in a bidding war between Silicon Valley and Beijing. And there are a few remaining Muh Free Enterprisers who confuse capitalism and monopoly corporatism, and who are happy to surrender their sovereignty if their twisted principles so demand. But there is only so much the silicon villains can do. Eventually, some enterprising entrepreneur in Latvia is going to have a server farm no one in Cupertino can switch off.

    1. The good news is that long term they may potentially force the competition that will ultimately lead to their own demise.

    2. Napster was the Barbra Streisand of the tubes. Parler is the Napster of the internet snowflakes.

  4. “A business gets to decide who it does business with,” Cohn says.

    Bake the cake.

      1. The problem is they then conspired with all the landlords and bakery suppliers after you did form your own bakery.

    1. Yeah, this was the quote that caught my attention.

    2. Read with the proper attitude:
      “A fascist business gets to decide which other fascist businesses it will deal with”

  5. Yeah it`s Possible…Anybody can earn 250$+ daily… You can earn from 6000-12000 a month or even more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish… It’s a flexible job But a good
    eaning opportunity.. Here is More information.

  6. “Amazon says it repeatedly notified Parler that its content was in violation of user terms and chose to take action only as a “last resort.” ”

    Is there evidence provided of these repeated requests?
    There are lists of similar remarks by progressives on Twitter. I think it would be safe to wager that the total number of violations is higher on Twitter than what was on Parler.

    1. It’s safe to say the total number of violations on Twitter JUST TODAY is higher than what appeared on Parler since forever.

      1. I would think that Parlor just needs to provide the 1 million+ pieces of evidence of “in kind” from Twitter and Facebook for comparison.

        1. Even if Amazon has the right to choose who it might fo business with, it does not have the right to enforce its own TOS unevenly, and their stated defense for chucking Parler is TOS violations, not the freedom to business with whom they choose.

          If Parler is rightfully thrown off because of TOS violations, it seems that they must similarly throw every platform off that breaks these sacred TOS, and likely violate contract law. And it would be a very easy job to show that Twitter runs afoul of the very same things Amazon threw Parler out for, and probably x 100 or more.

          1. While it’s tempting to think that’s correct as a matter of “fairness”, I’m almost certain that’s not correct as a matter of contract law.

            Those terms of service are part of the contract that Parler (or Twitter, etc.) has with AWS. If the customer breaches the contract, AWS can simply waive the breach. Waiving a breach for Customer A doesn’t require waiving for Customer B. That’s just fundamental contract law.

            It would be different if AWS was considered a common carrier, but it’s not. Common carriers – like railroads, pipelines, air freight – have to provide their services to anyone willing to pay their fee unless they have a compelling reason not to do (e.g., refusing hazardous cargo). They have to apply their rules evenly, because they aren’t legally allowed to discriminate between customers,

            1. It’s not contract law. There’s nothing in contract law that says TOS’s are allowed to be managed differently across customers. It’s common sense. The contract is between Parker and Amazon. What happens between Amazon and other customers is irrelevant to that contract.

              1. Since I started fre+lancing I’ve been bringing in (((($)))90 bucks/h… I sit at home and i am doing my work from my laptop. Th℮ best thing is that i get more time to spent with my family and with my kids and in the same time i can earn enough to support them…

                You can do it too. Start here—— > > Online Jobs provid

              2. Mr. Tibbs, well if we’re using the “common sense” standard, common sense tells us that Amazon can’t treat similar violations differently based on politics. This is the entire underpinning of “waiver” in trademark law and why we get such stupid things as McDonald’s lawyers sending a cease and desist list to McDonald’s Kilt Shop that makes a profit of $27 a year. Because McDonald’s is required to treat all trademark violations equally, and if it lets one skate, it risks not being able to pursue any of them. I see no COMMON SENSE reason why the same rule shouldn’t apply to Amazon enforcing its TOS.

  7. it must be established that Amazon and Twitter have a shared purpose in driving Parler out of business.

    “I think it is a high bar,” Cohn says. “I don’t see that the facts support it.”

    Really?

    1. lol…. I was looking for exactly this point.

      “Parler would still fail to furnish the evidence required to prove an antitrust violation.”

      As-If 3-BigTech companies banning and removing content within the EXACT same week isn’t ‘proof’ enough…. This is going down JUST like the election claims did. As if 90% favor during the middle of the night on Dec 4th in Multiple swing state’s isn’t ‘proof’ enough. Perhaps the ‘bullet’ pulled from a dead victim isn’t proof enough of a homicide either.

      Someone’s gotta a whole heck of a lot of explaining to do — but instead it seems the only ‘explaining’ going on is tainted narratives and a name-calling clown show.

      1. The issue isn’t whether Amazon, or anyone else, had a purpose. It’s whether Amazon and Twitter had a SHARED purpose. What’s the shared purpose?

        1. And here I was thinking Antitrust had something to do with shady practices used to block (silence) competition. Silly me.

        2. Denying free speech is the crime they share.

          For what purpose is irrelevant.

          I don’t need to know why criminals do what they do to stop them.

        3. That’s why Trump is accused of incitement, when it clearly doesn’t meet the legal standard, because incitement isn’t protected by 1a and they want to censor him.

  8. Section 230 guarantees you’re not liable for the content your users post on your platform.

    You are not, however, immune from liability from Jeff Bezos, Jack Dorsey, Apple, Google, Visa, Mastercard, Stripe and Paypal.

    1. You make a startling point; Landlords generally cannot evict renters at the drop of a dime without going through a termination process.

      1. Those pesky contracts.

  9. “Sonny Mazzone is the spring 2021 Burton C. Gray Memorial Intern at Reason.”

    Then I shall accept his legal opinion based entirely on those qualifications.

    1. He regurgitated talking points from the MSM. He has a good future here.

    2. My legal opinion isn’t being expressed just the two attorneys cited.

  10. If only Parler was a bakery they’d have a slam dunk case.

    1. Isn’t Amazon the bakery in this case? Parlor is the gay couple who just wants some cake.

      1. …To a T — But Parler hasn’t been granted those special *entitlement-to* rights yet.

        1. You mean like having their written contractual rights honored?

          1. They are certainly entitled to contractual terms and they should file claim in the judicial process.

      2. Parler is the straight couple who is too white and too straight. Amazon didn’t like this and got real mad because they didn’t like their friends. Who are also too straight.

    2. If only Parler were gay and/or a tranny, everyone would have to do their bidding.

    3. Parler has been buying generic cakes for some time now. Amazon found out Parler is straight and cut them off.

  11. Amazon is essentially a landlord on this case. They host the location and structure of where the business operates. Imagine a landlord being able to kick out a tenant on arbitrary whims against the contractual agreement. This isn’t allowed. Virtually every state has at a minimum 30 day minus until evicted. This at least gives the tenant a month to acquire new space to operate, inform customers, etc.

    AWS did not do this. Their actions were critical detriment to the company. They also seemingly conspired with other companies to deny services as well. On top of that Parler in their second filing stated the only communication they had from Amazon was them asking if Trump had joined Parler. This would imply the violence claims were a pretext.

    Also there was actual journalism done by Greenwald where he found not a single person arrested at the Capitol had a parler account. But we know the violence was organized on Facebook and Twitter, but no repercussions to either of them.

    Stop trying to defend corporate censorship.

    1. ^ This

      AWS argument is equivalent to your landlord saying that he told you to mow the lawn a number of times and he just didn’t think you did it fast enough or planned to keep doing it enough so he ‘suspended’ you from your house by changing the locks. There really isn’t anything you can do or say for him to give you the key, though.

      But – It isn’t really an eviction, he’ll help you move when you find a new place!

      1. Kicked you out for missing 1 blade of grass back in the corner.

        1. Here is your “1 blade of grass”:

          https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/13/amazon-says-violent-posts-forced-it-to-drop-parler-from-its-web-hosting-service.html

          Import from the link is right below:

          Amazon included some examples of that content in exhibits filed alongside its lawsuit, which include death threats against members of Congress, tech company executives like Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, as well as U.S. Capitol Police, among other groups. In some Parler posts, users made threats to “burn down Amazon delivery trucks” and Apple stores, as well as “seize Amazon’s servers.”

          “We should peacefully assemble outside all these tech tyrants homes and businesses, then peacefully protest and peacefully loot and burn them,” one Parler post read, according to the court filing.

          1. FYI…

            https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/12/tech/parler-online-violence/index.html

            Parler may be gone for now. That won’t stop the calls to violence online

            1. Go back to your shit bucket. You are too stupid to understand things.

      2. Did Amazon allow Parlor access to their data before locking them out? If they didn’t then this action is worse then just suspending their service.

    2. I don’t think JesseAz self-identifies as a libertarian capitalist per se, but I keep teasing him about being a libertarian without even knowing it because his instincts are spot-on. He’s just not necessarily expressing it in conventional libertarian terms, using conventional libertarian sign posts, or citing conventional libertarian thinkers. And that probably doesn’t matter!

      Still, there is libertarian thinking behind this that runs a lot deeper than private property and free association rights.

      Imagine there are only four suitable deep water ports on the west coast of the United States: Long Beach, Oakland, Portland, and Seattle–and imagine each of them is owned by four different entities. Now imagine that all four of those entities get together and decide that they’re not allowing Toyota to use any of their four ports–no matter what they’re willing to pay. Now, imagine that they have decided to band together and only allow Ford to use any of their ports–no matter what the other auto manufacturers are willing to pay.

      There is a libertarian argument, that libertarians have made, that says that when collusion is making the ability to do something impossible, the government may have a legitimate libertarian responsibility to step in and ensure people have that option–at least at some price. In other words, four operators colluding to shut down the entire west coast to port activity is not what we’re talking about when we talk about wanting a free market.

      Now apply that to the situation we see in social media–both from the perspective of, say, Donald Trump and from the perspective of Parler. Under normal circumstances, Donald Trump may not have the right to get on every social media service between Facebook, Instagram, Parler, Twitter, or YouTube. However, if they’re colluding against him to keep him off of all their services, a libertarian government may be right to insist that he has the option to be on at least one of them. Furthermore, if Parler is one of those options and they’re willing to host him–while other companies have come together to collude with the Democrat dominated government to eliminate Parler as an option for Trump, then government may be entirely wrong to violate rather than protect our rights.

      1. I’m a rational, non idealist, libertarian. There are no perfect worlds so I don’t proffer up idealistic solutions to things.

        1. And actual respect for the property of others, as is displayed by Section 230, which has worked VERY well, in the real world, by limiting Government Almighty power? JesseBahnFuhrer wants to tear THAT down, and replace it with an idealistic solution! He want MORE Government Almighty power to mess with YOUR web site!

          Hey JesseBahnFuhrer… Der TrumpfenFuhrer has 4 (four) days left in office… Are you STILL lusting to add MORE power to Der TrumpfenFuhrer’s desk? Is it through your thick head YET, that ALL of the powers you pile onto His Desk, ends up on the desk of Der BidenFuhrer? When Der BidenFuhrer and his democrat Congress butcher Section 230 (as YOU have been lusting after), do you think that that which replaces Section 230, is going to be to YOUR liking? Do you think that MAYBE, just MAYBE, simple, short laws LIMITING the power of Government Almighty (such as Section 230) MIGHT just be a GOOD idea, yet?

          1. Go back to huffing paint thinner and eating your own shit.

    3. Brilliant… Beat me to it. The main commenters here are so brilliant; seems nothing gets shoved aside in ignorance.

  12. I think the Sherman Act violation is a high bar and unlikely to succeed, I suspect the hope is that by throwing it in there AWS will settle to avoid discovery and reimburse Parler to some extent for the financial cost severing the contract imposed.

    I’m disappointed this article didn’t touch on the strongest of Parler’s claims, that AWS violated the contract by not providing 30 days notice of termination that gave them a chance to rectify any breach asserted. AWS is playing fast and lose with their characterization of Parler’s approach and falling short of any assertion that a notification of material breach was ever given.

    Do better, intern, do better.

    1. Yes, that 30 day notice is probably in the contract or terms of service.

      I suspect Amazon will try to get around that by claiming to have complained about Parler’s violent content for more than 30 days.

      Doesn’t answer the question of why Twitter gets away with it now, but that’s a different gay cake baker.

      1. I mean, it’s a Seattle judge so God help them, but from the filings even AWS admits that, when posts were brought to Parler’s attention, Parler did end up removing them. AWS alleges that they weren’t satisfied that Parler was ‘committed’ to the issue, which Parler counters by stating AWS was aware of Parler’s plans to implement an AI system in 2021 that would pre-screen out problematic posts and that, in fact, they had been discussing with Amazon using Amazon’s own AI.

        1. Parler didn’t violate the rights of the public fast enough so Amazon violated theirs.

          Admit that you’re ok with that as many have, or recognize the crime and stop them.

  13. The outcome of Parler’s lawsuit isn’t anywhere near as important as the big tech taking down a platform for free speech–at the behest of the government–specifically because people were using it to organize protests.

    If new states are added, Medicare for All is passed, the Green New Deal is passed, our gun rights are violated like never before, and the Supreme Court has been packed–all within Biden’s first 100 days in office–what difference does it make if Parler win’s an antitrust suit a year from now?

    If the new normal is a systematic purge of conservative voices from the internet at the behest of a single party government, then Parler’s win against Amazon on antitrust grounds will come far too late to make any difference.

    1. The Republicans need to start building support in Puerto Rico, etc.

      1. The Democrats may win in Wyoming before a Republican wins Puerto Rico.

        Puerto Rico’s politics are driven by two major parties: 1) the Popular Democratic party is affiliated with the Democratic Party in the USA, and 2) the New Progressive Party–about half of whose members affiliate with the Democratic Party in the USA.

        The rule of thumb might have it that more than 70% of Puerto Ricans would vote Democrat–if the party breakdowns of the old parties stayed the same.

        Whether Puerto Ricand would vote to become a state of the US is still an open question. The Popular Democratic Party is the one that wants to remain a commonwealth of the USA without being a state, which would be awkward to see the Democrats try and make them join the U.S. as a state against the local Democrats’ will.

    2. Just for the record; Parler will not win.
      This case or any other.

      Vote for fascists, get fascism.

      1. ^THIS; The biggest reason I believe voter fraud is massive. There just cannot possibly be that many American’s voting for a fascist nazi take-over… Could there be? I want proof!

    3. Ken wrote
      “If new states are added, Medicare for All is passed, the Green New Deal is passed, our gun rights are violated like never before, and the Supreme Court has been packed–all within Biden’s first 100 days in office–what difference does it make if Parler win’s an antitrust suit a year from now?”

      None of that will happen UNLESS Joe Manchin reneges on his promise to preserve the Senate filibuster.

      1. Noted!

  14. In regards to what I wrote above to JesseAZ about common carriers, collusion, etc., my fellow libertarians should probably familiarize themselves with RAND if they haven’t heard of it already.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing#Definitions

    RAND is an acronym for Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory, and it’s used as term for what happens when a patent becomes an essential part of a new industry standard.

    If a new industry springs up around your patent and depends on that patent, an open standards committee within the industry may come to you and say that they would like a RAND agreement with you–so that people know that if they adopt the new industry standard, you’ll license them your patent on a Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory basis. Making an industry standard around Betamax, so that all the VCR manufacturers know their players will play all the different studios’ releases, doesn’t make any sense if you refuse to license your patent to anyone but Sony and Disney.

    The ugly side of some parties refusing to be non-discriminatory in the use of their patent is a lot like what we’re looking at when Facebook, Google, Instagram, and Twitter collude to refuse service to a private party like Donald Trump or anyone proclaiming conservative views. They’ve basically instituted an industry standard depending on a patent that they refuse to share on a non-discriminatory basis. That might be their right, but, on the other hand, competitors should be allowed to develop a competing standard on their own patents.

    Killing Parler is not a good example of ensuring that kind of competition can take place.

  15. Yeah it’s not worth your time to fight the power. Just roll over and let the digital warlord take care of you.

  16. The monopolist Big Tech’s banning of Trump, conservatives, libertarians and others who support freedom speech and free markets will predictably result in their victims repaying in kind.

    Tens of millions of Trump supporters will simply respond in kind by boycotting left wing Big Tech service providers, retailers and other businesses who supported Biden, and by removing their left wing children (who voted for Biden and supported BLM) from their wills.

  17. Jeff Bezos finally get to take revenge on trump for Amazon losing out to Microsoft on the DOD cloud contract?

  18. The collusion is not between Amazon and Twitter. It’s between Amazon and the incoming administration. They are acting as agents of the government to censor opposition speech. I’ve been at the receiving end of that sort of unconstitutional bullshit. It needs to stop.

    1. Inciting treason is not constitutionally protected speech.

      1. [FOR USA ] Making money online more than $15k just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info on this page… Read More.

      2. lmao… Inciting treason = BAD but preforming treason = GOOD. You’ve got that right; and it’s EXACTLY why almost every single policy getting pitched by the left should be instantly exterminated for being UN-Constitutional and a violation of “The People’s” law over them.

        1. Well, that’s not how this works.

          Enacting the policy you were election to enact is not treason. It’s what you’re supposed to do.

          If you don’t like it you can try to win the next election.

          And other kindergarten lessons.

          1. Are we electing Gov-God Saviors of tyrannical control OR legislators binded by “The People’s” law over them?

            1. Only Trump supporters want fascism. All 70 million.

              1. lol – projecting again and it’s easy to see as your every post defends fascists because you are one.

      3. “No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

        1. More than two people saw it.

          1. Good luck with that, but fail you will

          2. More than two people watched Trump tell the crowd to protest peacefully and then halucinated that he was inciting them to riot, sure.

      4. cibodib139’s reply is more than your comment deserves.

  19. PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earningis are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
    on this page…… MORE INFO

  20. These are 2 pay checks $7 and $8. that i received in last 2 months.I am very happy that i can make thousands in my part time and now i am enjoying my life.Everybody can do this and earn lots of dollars from home in very short time period.Just visit this website now.
    TAP ON HERE USA JOB INFO

  21. I make 1 dollar an hour posting to internet. Very easy job and anyone can do it. Everyone need money during this time of COVID crisis.
    For detail click on here……………………… TAP ON HERE USA JOB INFO

  22. https://www.zdnet.com/article/three-or-four-guys-have-colonized-the-internet-and-its-wrong-says-revolution-populi/

    “Three or four guys have colonized the Internet, and it’s wrong,” said Rosenthal of Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter’s Jack Dorsey. “The model is broken: you can’t have a neutral public square and have one guy determine what can be said.”

    Zuckerberg and Dorsey, Galernter observed, never advertised themselves as being neutral. The problem, though, as he sees it, is that they overstepped their role. Like the phone company, they were supposed to provide a service, period.

    “Nobody knows about the phone company’s politics, or wants to know,” said Galernter. “We don’t want to chat things over with the phone company, we don’t want to chat things over with Zuckerberg and Dorsey.”

  23. When the public, in this case businesses, are allowed to access private property, in this case Amazon, who benefits from their access, the public carries their rights with them, in this case free speech content.

    Amazon does not have the legal right to limit the speech of the public businesses they welcome to host.

  24. If people were denied entrance to a restaurant, because they were homos or blacks, would the cancel culture be ok with that?

    Case closed.

  25. Just got a BBC flash on this one.

    Talented but flawed producer Phil Spector dies aged 81
    .www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55697979

    [Died in prison. Good.] TAP ON HERE USA JOB INFO

  26. Parler wants to use government to mug Amazon. Parler has no more right to AWS’ servers than does that sketchy guy in the alley to your wallet. Ordering it to do business with or pay damages to them would clearly be a taking akin to a mugging in a dark alley. Government is nothing more than a giant and elaborate switchblade and mask, and all in government are nothing more than muggers. Government was devised as a bandit’s weapon and disguise and that is all that it ever can be.

    1. The Supreme Court clearly disagreed with you.

      http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/326/501

      “ The more an owner, for his advantage, opens up his property for use by the public in general, the more do his rights become circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional rights of those who use it.”

      In other words, we carry our rights onto private property, like Amazon, and everywhere we go.

      1. Here we’ve a case of an oxymoron libertarian for bigger and more intrusive government not only citing the bigger and more intrusive government to support an argument for bigger and more intrusive government, but doing so improperly.

        Parler, not AWS, is open to the public. Parler claims to not be a publisher and, thus, has no speech to be infringed. If Parler is lying and is a publisher, it is subject to much criminal and civil liability; in addition to, AWS having even more right and responsibility to sever their relationship, to avoid similar liability.

        1. “Severing a relationship” to limit free speech, which Amazon has admitted to, is a clear violation of the 1a rights of everyone who uses Parler.

  27. “So in conclusion, brothers, over the five years I’ve posted on this website…”–roy, born Dec. 17, 2020.. WELCOME TO MY JOB

Comments are closed.