Florida Gov. DeSantis Has Just Signed A Bill Into Law That Would Allow Everyday Floridians To Sue Big Tech Platforms For Monetary Damages

[Faun]

They can't discriminate based on idelogy alone, nor should they be allowed to.

Why not? It’s their website.

For the same reason AT&T can not.

Wrong.

you think AT&T can discriminate? Sorry...https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/chapter-5/subchapter-II/part-I

(a)Charges, services, etc.
It shall be unlawful for any common carrier to make any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services for or in connection with like communication service, directly or indirectly, by any means or device, or to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, class of persons, or locality, or to subject any particular person, class of persons, or locality to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage.

LOLOLOLOL

So you think Facebook is a common carrier, huh?

 

[bripat9643]

Whatever role they play, facts are facts. There is no language in the Constitution about protected classes.

Fucking moron, there's no language in the Constitution about an air force either. According to your retardedness, the air force must therefore be unconstitutional.

Your point is a much better than his. Since under the constitution powers are enumerated, and when so done, those not enumerated, are excluded. So the president is commander in chief of the army and the navy and the militia when called into service. Which would exclude being c-in-c of any other military forces the US may have.
The president would remain the chief executive over them, but not have commander-in-chiefs absolute authority.

Meanwhile as far as creating protected classes of people, that would be covered in the constitution under the "general welfare" clause.

The same way that social security, medicare, and welfare programs are not specifically in the constitution, but they're clearly constitutional.

You're a special kind of stupid. This argument has been shot down 10 million times.

 

[meaner gene]

The airforce is obviously just an extension of the Army or Navy.

Absolutely WRONG.
Look at the command and control structure. The chief of the airforce does not answer to the Army

The composition of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is defined by statute and consists of a chairman (CJCS), a vice chairman (VJCS), the service chiefs of the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, Space Force, and the chief of the National Guard Bureau.

 

[Faun]

"All rights have limits . . . if they belong to conservatives. It's outrageous that they think they're allowed the same freedoms we are!"

"Facebook is being completely fair and impartial and moral!! I KNOW they are, because they're doing what I want, and they TOLD me they were!! How dare you contradict my beloved masters!!"\

"You deserve to be silenced, because you refuse to follow orders and think what we're told to!!"

Just curious: Was it the lobotomy or the castration that made you such a puling little lackey?

Why is it that you guys always sound like people immersed in self-pity and victimhood with a persecution complex on top of it all? It's weird because it's just so damn common place among conservatives.

Says the party of woke victimhood.

Democrats built a party on victimhood. Their whining about it is classic.

Democrats are Nazis.

Goebbles: Accuse others of what you are

That's Mustang and the Democrats

LOL

Now that's funny in a thread about how conservatives are victims.

The Democrat party is the victim party, so why aren't you attacking Democrats?

Fucking moron, see if you can pay attention for more than a nanosecond.... this thread is about conservative victimhood.

"All rights have limits . . . if they belong to conservatives. It's outrageous that they think they're allowed the same freedoms we are!"

"Facebook is being completely fair and impartial and moral!! I KNOW they are, because they're doing what I want, and they TOLD me they were!! How dare you contradict my beloved masters!!"\

"You deserve to be silenced, because you refuse to follow orders and think what we're told to!!"

Just curious: Was it the lobotomy or the castration that made you such a puling little lackey?

Why is it that you guys always sound like people immersed in self-pity and victimhood with a persecution complex on top of it all? It's weird because it's just so damn common place among conservatives.

Says the party of woke victimhood.

Democrats built a party on victimhood. Their whining about it is classic.

Democrats are Nazis.

Goebbles: Accuse others of what you are

That's Mustang and the Democrats

LOL

Now that's funny in a thread about how conservatives are victims.

The Democrat party is the victim party, so why aren't you attacking Democrats?

Fucking moron, see if you can pay attention for more than a nanosecond.... this thread is about conservative victimhood.

I posted the OP, jackass.

So? Were you expecting a cookie?

I sure wasn't expecting you to be embarassed about posting your idiocies.

Yet when someone asks me to prove my claims, I do.

You claim Facebook said they're a common carrier, yet despite numerous attempts to get you to post it, you won't. And now you hiding behind the veil of, I posted it, go find it.

It's clear you lied again.

 

[struth]

They can't discriminate based on idelogy alone, nor should they be allowed to.

Why not? It’s their website.

For the same reason AT&T can not.

Wrong.

you think AT&T can discriminate? Sorry...https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/chapter-5/subchapter-II/part-I

(a)Charges, services, etc.
It shall be unlawful for any common carrier to make any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services for or in connection with like communication service, directly or indirectly, by any means or device, or to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, class of persons, or locality, or to subject any particular person, class of persons, or locality to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage.

LOLOLOLOL

So you think Facebook is a common carrier, huh?

Of course they are

What Is a Common Carrier? Definition, How They Work, and Examples

A common carrier is a private or public entity that transport goods or people. Unlike private carrier services, it is available to anyone willing to pay its fee.

www.investopedia.com

A common carrier is defined by U.S. law as a private or public entity that transports goods or people from one place to another for a fee. The term is also used to describe telecommunications services and public utilities.

 

[Faun]

Huh? Govt can regulate businesses. That is not unConstitutional.

The regulations have to comply with the constitution. You can’t pass a regulation that impinges their constitutional rights.

what right is being impinged?

You don't think the tobacco company took issue with the fact the Obama admin was making them put massive graphics on their packages telling people it will kill them? Of course they did. But the Courts said, they had to do it...and it didn't violate their first amendment rights.

So you really think Facebook's rights are being violated here when all the law says is that hey....you got to provide a reason that you banned someone? and someone can sue you if they feel they were unfairly treated? or that you can't ban one political canidate over the other?

Freedom of speech.

Government has a societal need to promote public health by including safety warnings on products. There is no such need for Facebook to keep up anyone else's speech.

As for tobacco, depending on the size, type and character of the graphics, they have indeed been struck down as violating the first amendment in 2012 in R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. FDA.

Freedom of speech? Well, as you know that is not unlimited. Regardless though, Facebook is free to say whatever they want...just like AT&T...what they can't do is discriminate against consumers, and aren't above being regulated Public health is very important, but so is commerce v communication...hence why we regulate it as well.

Nothing is even keeping Facebook from banning someone, they can...all the law requires is that they be transparent about it.

Your post is self-contradictory. First you say that they can’t discriminate and then you say they can ban anyone they want.

Facebook is not ATT. Not even close. ATT is a common carrier, not a publisher. Facebook is not a common carrier, it is a publisher. They’re entirely different.

Regulations for communication cannot violate the first amendment. This does.

They can ban people, as long as they comply with the law. They can't discriminate based on idelogy alone, nor should they be allowed to. Can AT&T refuse to allow Dems to use their phone serves? Should they be allowed to?

Sorry but ideology is not a protected class.

(a)Charges, services, etc.
It shall be unlawful for any common carrier to make any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services for or in connection with like communication service, directly or indirectly, by any means or device, or to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, class of persons, or locality, or to subject any particular person, class of persons, or locality to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage.

ANY CLASS OF PERSON.

Great, now what does that have to do with Facebook and Twitter?

 

[Faun]

They can't discriminate based on idelogy alone, nor should they be allowed to.

Why not? It’s their website.

For the same reason AT&T can not.

Wrong.

you think AT&T can discriminate? Sorry...https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/chapter-5/subchapter-II/part-I

(a)Charges, services, etc.
It shall be unlawful for any common carrier to make any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services for or in connection with like communication service, directly or indirectly, by any means or device, or to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, class of persons, or locality, or to subject any particular person, class of persons, or locality to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage.

LOLOLOLOL

So you think Facebook is a common carrier, huh?

Of course they are

What Is a Common Carrier? Definition, How They Work, and Examples

A common carrier is a private or public entity that transport goods or people. Unlike private carrier services, it is available to anyone willing to pay its fee.

www.investopedia.com

A common carrier is defined by U.S. law as a private or public entity that transports goods or people from one place to another for a fee. The term is also used to describe telecommunications services and public utilities.

How much does it cost to post on Twitter and Facebook?

 

[meaner gene]

You're a special kind of stupid. This argument has been shot down 10 million times.

The president as C-in-C of the air force is through constitutional interpretation.

Your position that

Whatever role they play, facts are facts. There is no language in the Constitution about protected classes.

General Welfare clause covers it.

 

[kaz]

you can sue anybody for anything.
You can sue FB.
HOWEVER
Passing a law to create a cause of action where none exists for the purpose of damaging specific entities is unconstitutional.
Article 1 Section 9 "No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."

sorry no facebook and tweeter are protected under federal law from liability

Govt can make laws creating a cause of action

this isn’t a bill or attained or ex post facto law. 1) it’s not criminal 2) nobody is saying they are guilty of anything

Government CANNOT make laws intended to harm individuals.
It's that Constitution you guys love to ignore.

huh? not sure what you are talking about

Neither does he

 

[meaner gene]

What Is a Common Carrier? Definition, How They Work, and Examples

A common carrier is a private or public entity that transport goods or people. Unlike private carrier services, it is available to anyone willing to pay its fee.

www.investopedia.com

A common carrier is defined by U.S. law as a private or public entity that transports goods or people from one place to another for a fee. The term is also used to describe telecommunications services and public utilities.

Setting terms of service as long as the rules are non-discriminatory, is purely up to the carrier.

Such as a carrier could set that they only allow each person one account, and they can be banned for violation of their TOS.

 

[dblack]

Nah. It's more fundamental than that. Something so fundamental, the founders saw no reason to call it out in the Constitution. We're talking about the freedom to say "no" - with or without a "good reason", with or without "transparency" or "consistency".

And Facebook et al still have the freedom to do so without transparency or consistency, but now individuals have a cause of action against Facebook if they do.

"Cause of action"? For what. Is it now illegal to be non-transparent and inconsistent? By what justification? Who's rights are being violated?

Beyond that, your excuses don't hold water:

The law, Florida Senate Bill 7072, provides several new checks on tech and social media companies. Among other things:

• Platforms cannot ban or deprioritize candidates for state office.
• Platforms cannot ban or deprioritize any news outlet meeting certain size requirements.
• Platforms must be transparent about moderation processes and give users notice of moderation actions.
• Users and the state will have the right to sue companies that violate the law. Statutory fines could be as high as $250,000 per day for some offenses.

Sorry, I don't want government sticking its dick into social media.

 

[dblack]

To be more precise, members who are running for public office. The law would allow Florida to fine Twitter for banning such members for more than 14 days.

You know that is not the real goal of the legislation, right?

It's pretty obvious what the real goal of the legislation is.

 

[dblack]

Freedom of speech?

Nah. It's more fundamental than that. Something so fundamental, the founders saw no reason to call it out in the Constitution. We're talking about the freedom to say "no" - with or without a "good reason", with or without "transparency" or "consistency".

The government flushed that right down the toilet a long time ago.

Not entirely. But some fools keep pushing it further in that direction.

 

[Godboy]

They will stop it themselves once they start losing millions of dollars to lawsuits every day.

They just won't pay it. Then Florida will have to spend millions on litigation which I'm sure most of the citizens won't favor, because no court in the country would enforce such fines.

They will pay it. They wont have a choice.

 

[meaner gene]

Sorry, I don't want government sticking its dick into social media.

It's even worse than that. Under the new law, if Matt Gaetz posted pictures of his underaged girls involved in sexually explicit acts (child pornography) the social media company could not take them down for 30 days.

 

[bripat9643]

They can't discriminate based on idelogy alone, nor should they be allowed to.

Why not? It’s their website.

For the same reason AT&T can not.

Wrong.

you think AT&T can discriminate? Sorry...https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/chapter-5/subchapter-II/part-I

(a)Charges, services, etc.
It shall be unlawful for any common carrier to make any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services for or in connection with like communication service, directly or indirectly, by any means or device, or to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, class of persons, or locality, or to subject any particular person, class of persons, or locality to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage.

LOLOLOLOL

So you think Facebook is a common carrier, huh?

Facebook does. It has said so in court.

 

[Faun]

They will stop it themselves once they start losing millions of dollars to lawsuits every day.

They just won't pay it. Then Florida will have to spend millions on litigation which I'm sure most of the citizens won't favor, because no court in the country would enforce such fines.

They will pay it. They wont have a choice.

Of course they have a choice. Choice a) pay it. Choice b) don't pay it. Choice c) fight it in court.

My guess is they will opt for choice c.

 

[bripat9643]

"All rights have limits . . . if they belong to conservatives. It's outrageous that they think they're allowed the same freedoms we are!"

"Facebook is being completely fair and impartial and moral!! I KNOW they are, because they're doing what I want, and they TOLD me they were!! How dare you contradict my beloved masters!!"\

"You deserve to be silenced, because you refuse to follow orders and think what we're told to!!"

Just curious: Was it the lobotomy or the castration that made you such a puling little lackey?

Why is it that you guys always sound like people immersed in self-pity and victimhood with a persecution complex on top of it all? It's weird because it's just so damn common place among conservatives.

Says the party of woke victimhood.

Democrats built a party on victimhood. Their whining about it is classic.

Democrats are Nazis.

Goebbles: Accuse others of what you are

That's Mustang and the Democrats

LOL

Now that's funny in a thread about how conservatives are victims.

The Democrat party is the victim party, so why aren't you attacking Democrats?

Fucking moron, see if you can pay attention for more than a nanosecond.... this thread is about conservative victimhood.

"All rights have limits . . . if they belong to conservatives. It's outrageous that they think they're allowed the same freedoms we are!"

"Facebook is being completely fair and impartial and moral!! I KNOW they are, because they're doing what I want, and they TOLD me they were!! How dare you contradict my beloved masters!!"\

"You deserve to be silenced, because you refuse to follow orders and think what we're told to!!"

Just curious: Was it the lobotomy or the castration that made you such a puling little lackey?

Why is it that you guys always sound like people immersed in self-pity and victimhood with a persecution complex on top of it all? It's weird because it's just so damn common place among conservatives.

Says the party of woke victimhood.

Democrats built a party on victimhood. Their whining about it is classic.

Democrats are Nazis.

Goebbles: Accuse others of what you are

That's Mustang and the Democrats

LOL

Now that's funny in a thread about how conservatives are victims.

The Democrat party is the victim party, so why aren't you attacking Democrats?

Fucking moron, see if you can pay attention for more than a nanosecond.... this thread is about conservative victimhood.

I posted the OP, jackass.

So? Were you expecting a cookie?

I sure wasn't expecting you to be embarassed about posting your idiocies.

Yet when someone asks me to prove my claims, I do.

You claim Facebook said they're a common carrier, yet despite numerous attempts to get you to post it, you won't. And now you hiding behind the veil of, I posted it, go find it.

It's clear you lied again.

Here ya go, asshole:

Billion-dollar Israeli lawsuit against Facebook thrown out

 

[bripat9643]

Sorry, I don't want government sticking its dick into social media.

It's even worse than that. Under the new law, if Matt Gaetz posted pictures of his underaged girls involved in sexually explicit acts (child pornography) the social media company could not take them down for 30 days.

Wrong. It doesn't bar media companies from barring photos or vidoes of illegal acts, like child pornography.

 

[kaz]

Democrats running around screaming free markets! Free markets! Just unbelievable. Literally, as if they care about free markets.

They are just cheering because it's working, Republicans are being silenced.

And dblack doesn't see a problem

it’s not even about free markets. Free markets welcome the exchange of ideas, not censorship.

with that said, facebook is free in a free society to publish the content they want...with that said they should therefore be treated the same as everyone else in that business

Exchange of ideas like football players kneeling during the National Anthem? How did the right like that exchange of ideas?

The football players were only silenced AT WORK. No one silenced them other than that. Or proposed it.

Be more specific about the political protests you do at work

You mean like some are only silenced on Twitter or Facebook?

And ... Parlor ... Who was shut down by Google, not even their competitor. It's a clear anti-trust violation.

But you're here because you support free markets!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sure, that's what you care about!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!