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

[struth]

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs law to hold Big Tech companies accountable for content moderation practices

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday signed a measure that he says will protect state residents from Silicon Valley’s “power grab on speech, thought and content.”

www.foxbusiness.com

Smile

Good luck imposing laws on companies in other states.

So if you are on a Forum and live in Florida but it is run in New Jersey that would negate the law?

States can't dictate laws in other states. A person who breaks the law can only be charged by the state where the law was violated.

Sure FL can't dictate NJ law, but if a NJ business is doing business in FL it has to flow FL law...and since it's doing business in FL, FL has jurisdiction over the business

 

[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.

After YOU posted the definition of a common carrier, which includes...

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. ​

... I can only presume you refuse to answer my question about how much does it cost to post on Facebook because that caused you to realize your own post with that definition utterly destroyed your claim that Facebook is a common carrier.

why did you cut off my quote? I find you lost all cred when you did that.

Here is the remainder of the quote for those paying attention at home "The term is also used to describe telecommunications services and public utilities."

Facebook et al aren't considered them now under the law, the issue presented and being discussed is treating them like one

LOL

You even admit the part I cut off is irrelevant. But I suppose you had to whine about something after embarrassing yourself like that.

lord not....it’s why they cii op is be common carriers

Of course you did. You pointed out Facebook isn't a telecommunication service or a public utility.

So now I see you whined about me cutting out irrelevancies as a diversion from you pointing out a requirement of a common carrier is paying them for their service whereas Facebook is free to members.

Currently they aren't regulated as such, but should be in my opinion, and appears to be the way things are headed...even the SCOTUS openly discussed it.

That's the point I was making.

No one cares what you want. The bottom line is Facebook is not a common carrier which even you unwittingly admitted when you posted a definition of a common carrier that includes thrre is a fee for such services.

That's why I asked you how much it costs to post on Facebook.

That's why you ignored that question.

Three times.

Because you can't bring yourself to admit Facebook isn't a common common carrier even though you yourself demonstrated they are not.

 

[August West]

Let Freedom Ring ....

Down with all who HATE the US Constitution.

Does that go for those who tried to install a president who clearly lost an election?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I love this solution.

Well it will never happen, so enjoy the articles on it.

 

[Faun]

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs law to hold Big Tech companies accountable for content moderation practices

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday signed a measure that he says will protect state residents from Silicon Valley’s “power grab on speech, thought and content.”

www.foxbusiness.com

Smile

Good luck imposing laws on companies in other states.

So if you are on a Forum and live in Florida but it is run in New Jersey that would negate the law?

States can't dictate laws in other states. A person who breaks the law can only be charged by the state where the law was violated.

Sure FL can't dictate NJ law, but if a NJ business is doing business in FL it has to flow FL law...and since it's doing business in FL, FL has jurisdiction over the business

Florida has no jurisdiction over a business being run in another state.

 

[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.

After YOU posted the definition of a common carrier, which includes...

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. ​

... I can only presume you refuse to answer my question about how much does it cost to post on Facebook because that caused you to realize your own post with that definition utterly destroyed your claim that Facebook is a common carrier.

why did you cut off my quote? I find you lost all cred when you did that.

Here is the remainder of the quote for those paying attention at home "The term is also used to describe telecommunications services and public utilities."

Facebook et al aren't considered them now under the law, the issue presented and being discussed is treating them like one

LOL

You even admit the part I cut off is irrelevant. But I suppose you had to whine about something after embarrassing yourself like that.

lord not....it’s why they cii op is be common carriers

Of course you did. You pointed out Facebook isn't a telecommunication service or a public utility.

So now I see you whined about me cutting out irrelevancies as a diversion from you pointing out a requirement of a common carrier is paying them for their service whereas Facebook is free to members.

Currently they aren't regulated as such, but should be in my opinion, and appears to be the way things are headed...even the SCOTUS openly discussed it.

That's the point I was making.

No one cares what you want. The bottom line is Facebook is not a common carrier which even you unwittingly admitted when you posted a definition of a common carrier that includes thrre is a fee for such services.

That's why I asked you how much it costs to post on Facebook.

That's why you ignored that question.

Three times.

Because you can't bring yourself to admit Facebook isn't a common common carrier even though you yourself demonstrated they are not.

I never said they were currently one.

I have highlighted that is what they should be regulated like, and highlighted that is the direction the Court sees as well.

Geez

 

[struth]

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs law to hold Big Tech companies accountable for content moderation practices

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday signed a measure that he says will protect state residents from Silicon Valley’s “power grab on speech, thought and content.”

www.foxbusiness.com

Smile

Good luck imposing laws on companies in other states.

So if you are on a Forum and live in Florida but it is run in New Jersey that would negate the law?

States can't dictate laws in other states. A person who breaks the law can only be charged by the state where the law was violated.

Sure FL can't dictate NJ law, but if a NJ business is doing business in FL it has to flow FL law...and since it's doing business in FL, FL has jurisdiction over the business

Florida has no jurisdiction over a business being run in another state.

Sure...but if they business avails itself to do business in FL it does. Please keep up.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The test if a business has min contacts to establish personal jurisdiction over a business, comes out of International Shoe Co. v Washington:

(1) The nonresident defendant must do some act or consummate some transaction with the forum or perform some act by which he purposefully avails himself of the privilege of conducting activities in the forum, thereby invoking the benefits and protections[;] (2) the claim must be one which arises out of or results from the defendant's forum-related activities[; and] (3) exercise of jurisdiction must be reasonable

So when Facebook puts itself out on the internet, and ask for money for ads...from says Disney...it's satisfied the test.

Then they can go after Disneyland--not Facebook. Facebook doesn't ask for ads, companies contact Facebook to do business with them. Now if it's a Florida company, then yes, they can make regulations of that Florida based company. They can't dictate to Facebook or Twitter how they will run their company because a Florida based company decided to do business with them.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs law to hold Big Tech companies accountable for content moderation practices

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday signed a measure that he says will protect state residents from Silicon Valley’s “power grab on speech, thought and content.”

www.foxbusiness.com

Smile

So do we have a right to post on privately owned platforms? I don't think the SCOTUS is going to agree with that.

 

[struth]

The test if a business has min contacts to establish personal jurisdiction over a business, comes out of International Shoe Co. v Washington:

(1) The nonresident defendant must do some act or consummate some transaction with the forum or perform some act by which he purposefully avails himself of the privilege of conducting activities in the forum, thereby invoking the benefits and protections[;] (2) the claim must be one which arises out of or results from the defendant's forum-related activities[; and] (3) exercise of jurisdiction must be reasonable

So when Facebook puts itself out on the internet, and ask for money for ads...from says Disney...it's satisfied the test.

Then they can go after Disneyland--not Facebook. Facebook doesn't ask for ads, companies contact Facebook to do business with them. Now if it's a Florida company, then yes, they can make regulations of that Florida based company. They can't dictate to Facebook or Twitter how they will run their company because a Florida based company decided to do business with them.

Sorry, that's just silly....Facebook makes itself available to put ads for companies in FL...moreover, Facebook even has a team that helps businesses that create pages, market themselves. They have teams of Account Managers that go and deal with busuinesses, both large and small. They charge a fee for promoting your businesses, and different add ons etc.

 

[colfax_m]

I have highlighted that is what they should be regulated like, and highlighted that is the direction the Court sees as well

Mmm, I wouldn’t put too much stock into the musings of a single justice. Especially one who is well outside the mainstream on SCOTUS.

 

[struth]

I have highlighted that is what they should be regulated like, and highlighted that is the direction the Court sees as well

Mmm, I wouldn’t put too much stock into the musings of a single justice. Especially one who is well outside the mainstream on SCOTUS.

How is he out of the mainstream of the SCOTUS justices? what's the "mainstream?" Was it RBG who was frankly mainly famous for her numerous dissent opinions?

His, well written opinion, and argument has been the argument made by numerous people in Washington, from the left and right...especially the anti-trust issues

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sorry, that's just silly....Facebook makes itself available to put ads for companies in FL...moreover, Facebook even has a team that helps businesses that create pages, market themselves. They have teams of Account Managers that go and deal with busuinesses, both large and small. They charge a fee for promoting your businesses, and different add ons etc.

I don't know what your experience is doing business with Facebook, but it still doesn't change the fact that doing business with a Florida company doesn't give the state the right to control their TOS when they are in California. They can regulate what that business in Florida must do to deal with Facebook or Twitter, but they cannot control Facebook or Twitter because of it.

USMB accepts advertisement to keep it open. Do you believe that if some company based in New York city advertises on USMB, New York state can create law that forces USMB to take down my conservative posts?

 

[Faun]

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs law to hold Big Tech companies accountable for content moderation practices

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday signed a measure that he says will protect state residents from Silicon Valley’s “power grab on speech, thought and content.”

www.foxbusiness.com

Smile

Good luck imposing laws on companies in other states.

So if you are on a Forum and live in Florida but it is run in New Jersey that would negate the law?

States can't dictate laws in other states. A person who breaks the law can only be charged by the state where the law was violated.

Sure FL can't dictate NJ law, but if a NJ business is doing business in FL it has to flow FL law...and since it's doing business in FL, FL has jurisdiction over the business

Florida has no jurisdiction over a business being run in another state.

Sure...but if they business avails itself to do business in FL it does. Please keep up.

LOL

So if you shop on Amazon and you purchase something which is shipped from another state -- whose state sales tax do you think you're paying?

 

[colfax_m]

There are a lot of politicans...and a lot of politicans have been targeted by Facebook et al.

Can you name three?

Trump was one as well...and it was really highlighted in the 2020 election. One example was how they blocked a negative story about the Xiden family corrupt business practices overseas.

The article violated their guidelines on doxxing since the article published the personal email address. It was shoddy journalism.

 

[struth]

There are a lot of politicans...and a lot of politicans have been targeted by Facebook et al.

Can you name three?

Trump was one as well...and it was really highlighted in the 2020 election. One example was how they blocked a negative story about the Xiden family corrupt business practices overseas.

The article violated their guidelines on doxxing since the article published the personal email address. It was shoddy journalism.

guidlelines they just created because of the story...the story was accurate.

 

[struth]

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs law to hold Big Tech companies accountable for content moderation practices

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday signed a measure that he says will protect state residents from Silicon Valley’s “power grab on speech, thought and content.”

www.foxbusiness.com

Smile

Good luck imposing laws on companies in other states.

So if you are on a Forum and live in Florida but it is run in New Jersey that would negate the law?

States can't dictate laws in other states. A person who breaks the law can only be charged by the state where the law was violated.

Sure FL can't dictate NJ law, but if a NJ business is doing business in FL it has to flow FL law...and since it's doing business in FL, FL has jurisdiction over the business

Florida has no jurisdiction over a business being run in another state.

Sure...but if they business avails itself to do business in FL it does. Please keep up.

LOL

So if you shop on Amazon and you purchase something which is shipped from another state -- whose state sales tax do you think you're paying?

my home state but i fail to see what that has to do with my comment or the discussion

 

[struth]

Sorry, that's just silly....Facebook makes itself available to put ads for companies in FL...moreover, Facebook even has a team that helps businesses that create pages, market themselves. They have teams of Account Managers that go and deal with busuinesses, both large and small. They charge a fee for promoting your businesses, and different add ons etc.

I don't know what your experience is doing business with Facebook, but it still doesn't change the fact that doing business with a Florida company doesn't give the state the right to control their TOS when they are in California. They can regulate what that business in Florida must do to deal with Facebook or Twitter, but they cannot control Facebook or Twitter because of it.

USMB accepts advertisement to keep it open. Do you believe that if some company based in New York city advertises on USMB, New York state can create law that forces USMB to take down my conservative posts?

i didn’t say they could dictate their TOS. just that the they had jurisdiction and can hall them into court and they had to follow the laws

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

i didn’t say they could dictate their TOS. just that the they had jurisdiction and can hall them into court and they had to follow the laws

Okay, so if New York said that USMB must keep all liberal posts up regardless if they broke USMB terms of service or they will be fined, does USMB have to do that because a company in their state is advertising with this service? Because this is exactly what Florida is trying to do; dictate their TOS and actions on conservative posts.

 

[colfax_m]

guidlelines they just created because of the story...the story was accurate.

Nope. Doxxing has been against guidelines for a LOOOONG time.

It’s been explicitly posted in their TOS.