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

[Dadoalex]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

govt can create cause of action

Not directed at harming a specific individual.

this law isn’t directed at a specific individual

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

ok...and how does that appply here?

Legislative act...check
Singles out...check
fines=punishment w/o trial...check and Check.

haha it singles out nobody

nor punishes anyone without them being found in violation via due process

Does
and Does

So there.

Geez.

show me where in the law it singles any one out specifically

GROUP DUMBASS!

since when can’t govt regulate an entire group? they do it all the time, from the diary industry, to tobacco, clothes, booze, etc

They can't. LOOK IT UP.

It can regulate milk
But I can't do so with the INTENT of harming a cow or a group of cows.

Geez.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

In your hypothetical, USMB would have to figure out a way to comply with the law for NY users. How they do it is really not the state of New York's problem; it's USMB's. Either they figure out how to program their site to show all posts to users in NY while blocking some posts in other states, OR they decide not to block any posts at all, OR they find a way to block users in NY from using their site at all.

 

[Dadoalex]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

govt can create cause of action

Not directed at harming a specific individual.

this law isn’t directed at a specific individual

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

ok...and how does that appply here?

Legislative act...check
Singles out...check
fines=punishment w/o trial...check and Check.

Who does it single out?

My god you are stupid.
Internet platforms and information providers.
You know, just like DuhDumbass bragged.

Try reading some news sometime.

So laws against air pollution from coal fired generators are "singling out" utility companies?

You really are incredibly stupid.

Of course. Laws don't say you can't pollute. They say that if the amount of pollution exceeds X then you get fined Y. Companies then make their business decisions. Coal fired generators or smelting plants, all the same. As permitted by the EPA regulations passed by Congress and affirmed by the SCOTUS. Under that damned General Welfare clause.

This piece of crap? Sorry. 1, 10, and expostfacto.

Wanna try another stupid analogy?

Nope. They have specific regulations for coal fired power plants. For instance, the have rules regulating how tall the smoke stack has to be.

You're simply too stupid to waste time arguing with.

Then go be stupid elsewhere.
It'll be easy for you.

 

[struth]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

govt can create cause of action

Not directed at harming a specific individual.

this law isn’t directed at a specific individual

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

ok...and how does that appply here?

Legislative act...check
Singles out...check
fines=punishment w/o trial...check and Check.

Who does it single out?

My god you are stupid.
Internet platforms and information providers.
You know, just like DuhDumbass bragged.

Try reading some news sometime.

So laws against air pollution from coal fired generators are "singling out" utility companies?

You really are incredibly stupid.

Of course. Laws don't say you can't pollute. They say that if the amount of pollution exceeds X then you get fined Y. Companies then make their business decisions. Coal fired generators or smelting plants, all the same. As permitted by the EPA regulations passed by Congress and affirmed by the SCOTUS. Under that damned General Welfare clause.

This piece of crap? Sorry. 1, 10, and expostfacto.

Wanna try another stupid analogy?

Nope. They have specific regulations for coal fired power plants. For instance, the have rules regulating how tall the smoke stack has to be.

You're simply too stupid to waste time arguing with.

Then go be stupid elsewhere.
It'll be easy for you.

hahah please tell us all about a Bill of Attainder

 

[struth]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

govt can create cause of action

Not directed at harming a specific individual.

this law isn’t directed at a specific individual

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

ok...and how does that appply here?

Legislative act...check
Singles out...check
fines=punishment w/o trial...check and Check.

haha it singles out nobody

nor punishes anyone without them being found in violation via due process

Does
and Does

So there.

Geez.

show me where in the law it singles any one out specifically

GROUP DUMBASS!

since when can’t govt regulate an entire group? they do it all the time, from the diary industry, to tobacco, clothes, booze, etc

They can't. LOOK IT UP.

It can regulate milk
But I can't do so with the INTENT of harming a cow or a group of cows.

Geez.

they have regulations to protect consumers. If not completed with the farmer or business can be harmed via a fine etc

just like here

 

[struth]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

Yes. That's generally how causes of action come about, unless they already existed at common law.

But those laws cannot be directed at specific individuals.
Article 1, Section 9.

hahaa it’s not a bill or attainer because it’s not convicting anyone of a crime

I'm sure your opinion is well respected in toilets around the country but it is wrong.

haha it’s not an opinion...it’s the definition

Here's your definition

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

Try reading.

It doesn't single out an individual or group, turd.

It not only singles out a group for punishment is selectively excludes a member of that group.

Just how stupid are you anyway?
They're bragging about how this bit of pandering is going to bring those nasty internet companies in line. How can you be so stupid as to claim the bill is not doing what its creators are claiming credit for it doing?

Geez, what a maroon!

huh? how does it do that

Try reading.
I'm sure there are site with the bill's details.

i did.

i assume it’s the same website you went to to learn what a bill or attainer was...hahaha

Really?
You went to a site on the Constitution or legal definitions to read up on DuhDumbass' bill?

Explains much

hahaa it’s clear you haven’t gone anywhere to learn about the things you are rambling about

 

[WEATHER53]

Harming Trump is no longer necessary and neither is the policy that accomplished it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Harming Trump is no longer necessary and neither is the policy that accomplished it.

I would disagree with that. They are still scared to death of President Trump. They know if he runs in 24, he'll kill Dementia or Whorris, whoever is there. They also fear him in 22 if he goes out and campaigns for various Republican candidates.

After Biden won, they were already talking about making a law that anybody running for President must show 10 years of tax returns because they know Trump wouldn't do it. That's how scared of him they are. When they finally realized it would be unconstitutional to change the requirements, they dropped the subject so it seems.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

In your hypothetical, USMB would have to figure out a way to comply with the law for NY users. How they do it is really not the state of New York's problem; it's USMB's. Either they figure out how to program their site to show all posts to users in NY while blocking some posts in other states, OR they decide not to block any posts at all, OR they find a way to block users in NY from using their site at all.

That's what I'm saying, they are trying to dictate how a company must have their TOS. However USMB wouldn't have to comply unless they were in New York where the government has jurisdiction. They have no jurisdiction if USMB is in Texas somewhere because there is no way to change their moderating just for NY. They would have to change it for everybody. Since the thread I was participating in was merged with this much larger thread and you didn't see one of my other posts, what if 30 states each had different laws on how USMB must conduct their service? Would they have to change for each one, and what if two states were conflicting?

Dictating is for dictators, not Governors of a state in the US.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You are actually incorrect. States can and do pass laws requiring businesses based in other states to do certain things a certain way when doing business in their state. And those businesses can and do get sued in that state for not complying, regardless of where they're based.

Let me give you a for-instance. One of my biggest clients is a law firm in Nevada which represents Allstate Insurance. Allstate Insurance is based in Northbrook, Illinois. However, Allstate sells insurance coverage to drivers in Nevada, largely online these days. And if you know anything about auto insurance, you know that every state in the Union has a whole raft of regulatory laws regarding it, and they're all different. Allstate is required to comply with the laws of each state they sell insurance in. How they manage that is Allstate's problem, not the state of Nevada's. And Allstate gets sued in the courts of the state of Nevada often enough to make their lawyers one of my biggest clients.

Again, apples and oranges.

Allstate is selling a service be it online or over the phone. Facebook and Twitter are free. I've never been on Twitter. When somebody tells me they tweeted something, it sounds kind of for me. But I've been on FB for over 10 years now and never spent a dime.

When shopping online started to gain momentum, our state was losing money because the online vendors were not charging state tax for Ohio. Our state told various popular vendors they will be held liable for the money we didn't receive from those sales, so they all had to start charging Ohio sales tax for customers that lived in our state. However our state did not have any authority to tell them how to organize their web page, what options they must offer for the entire country or world, what their terms of service has to be.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

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.

I disagree that that is what the Florida law does. The part where social media is required to give a platform for political candidates is somewhat troubling and probably should be shot down on Constitutional grounds.

The part providing for a cause of action for users if social media is not clear about TOS or has been arbitrary in moderation is anything but telling them how to operate. That's like saying that government providing a cause of action for the defective manufacture of an automobile that causes injuries is telling the auto manufacturers what to do.

Either way, it is government interference. The question is whether or not we are willing to tolerate such interference.

Given some of the shit that's going down, I am torn. Nothing disturbs me more than seeing discourse completely shut down. That is the worst way for a society to arrive at the truth.

 

[bripat9643]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

govt can create cause of action

Not directed at harming a specific individual.

this law isn’t directed at a specific individual

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

ok...and how does that appply here?

Legislative act...check
Singles out...check
fines=punishment w/o trial...check and Check.

Who does it single out?

My god you are stupid.
Internet platforms and information providers.
You know, just like DuhDumbass bragged.

Try reading some news sometime.

So laws against air pollution from coal fired generators are "singling out" utility companies?

You really are incredibly stupid.

Of course. Laws don't say you can't pollute. They say that if the amount of pollution exceeds X then you get fined Y. Companies then make their business decisions. Coal fired generators or smelting plants, all the same. As permitted by the EPA regulations passed by Congress and affirmed by the SCOTUS. Under that damned General Welfare clause.

This piece of crap? Sorry. 1, 10, and expostfacto.

Wanna try another stupid analogy?

Nope. They have specific regulations for coal fired power plants. For instance, the have rules regulating how tall the smoke stack has to be.

You're simply too stupid to waste time arguing with.

Then go be stupid elsewhere.
It'll be easy for you.

That is so witty!

 

[Dadoalex]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

govt can create cause of action

Not directed at harming a specific individual.

this law isn’t directed at a specific individual

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

ok...and how does that appply here?

Legislative act...check
Singles out...check
fines=punishment w/o trial...check and Check.

Who does it single out?

My god you are stupid.
Internet platforms and information providers.
You know, just like DuhDumbass bragged.

Try reading some news sometime.

So laws against air pollution from coal fired generators are "singling out" utility companies?

You really are incredibly stupid.

Of course. Laws don't say you can't pollute. They say that if the amount of pollution exceeds X then you get fined Y. Companies then make their business decisions. Coal fired generators or smelting plants, all the same. As permitted by the EPA regulations passed by Congress and affirmed by the SCOTUS. Under that damned General Welfare clause.

This piece of crap? Sorry. 1, 10, and expostfacto.

Wanna try another stupid analogy?

Nope. They have specific regulations for coal fired power plants. For instance, the have rules regulating how tall the smoke stack has to be.

You're simply too stupid to waste time arguing with.

Then go be stupid elsewhere.
It'll be easy for you.

hahah please tell us all about a Bill of Attainder

Sorry. Not a history or law class. Try your local community college. Theyy accept 3rd grade dropouts,

 

[Dadoalex]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

govt can create cause of action

Not directed at harming a specific individual.

this law isn’t directed at a specific individual

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

ok...and how does that appply here?

Legislative act...check
Singles out...check
fines=punishment w/o trial...check and Check.

haha it singles out nobody

nor punishes anyone without them being found in violation via due process

Does
and Does

So there.

Geez.

show me where in the law it singles any one out specifically

GROUP DUMBASS!

since when can’t govt regulate an entire group? they do it all the time, from the diary industry, to tobacco, clothes, booze, etc

They can't. LOOK IT UP.

It can regulate milk
But I can't do so with the INTENT of harming a cow or a group of cows.

Geez.

they have regulations to protect consumers. If not completed with the farmer or business can be harmed via a fine etc

just like here

Regulations don't say "JOE SMITH" or "OWNERS OF BROWN COWS" do they?

Care to bet a 2 year ban on whether this is upheld?

 

[Dadoalex]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

Yes. That's generally how causes of action come about, unless they already existed at common law.

But those laws cannot be directed at specific individuals.
Article 1, Section 9.

hahaa it’s not a bill or attainer because it’s not convicting anyone of a crime

I'm sure your opinion is well respected in toilets around the country but it is wrong.

haha it’s not an opinion...it’s the definition

Here's your definition

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

Try reading.

It doesn't single out an individual or group, turd.

It not only singles out a group for punishment is selectively excludes a member of that group.

Just how stupid are you anyway?
They're bragging about how this bit of pandering is going to bring those nasty internet companies in line. How can you be so stupid as to claim the bill is not doing what its creators are claiming credit for it doing?

Geez, what a maroon!

huh? how does it do that

Try reading.
I'm sure there are site with the bill's details.

i did.

i assume it’s the same website you went to to learn what a bill or attainer was...hahaha

Really?
You went to a site on the Constitution or legal definitions to read up on DuhDumbass' bill?

Explains much

hahaa it’s clear you haven’t gone anywhere to learn about the things you are rambling about

It's clear you haven't the intelligence to go learn about the things you fail to comprehend.
Tiny brains have that impact you know.

 

[Dadoalex]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

govt can create cause of action

Not directed at harming a specific individual.

this law isn’t directed at a specific individual

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

ok...and how does that appply here?

Legislative act...check
Singles out...check
fines=punishment w/o trial...check and Check.

Who does it single out?

My god you are stupid.
Internet platforms and information providers.
You know, just like DuhDumbass bragged.

Try reading some news sometime.

So laws against air pollution from coal fired generators are "singling out" utility companies?

You really are incredibly stupid.

Of course. Laws don't say you can't pollute. They say that if the amount of pollution exceeds X then you get fined Y. Companies then make their business decisions. Coal fired generators or smelting plants, all the same. As permitted by the EPA regulations passed by Congress and affirmed by the SCOTUS. Under that damned General Welfare clause.

This piece of crap? Sorry. 1, 10, and expostfacto.

Wanna try another stupid analogy?

Nope. They have specific regulations for coal fired power plants. For instance, the have rules regulating how tall the smoke stack has to be.

You're simply too stupid to waste time arguing with.

Then go be stupid elsewhere.
It'll be easy for you.

That is so witty!

Surely the only smart thing you've ever said.

 

[struth]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

govt can create cause of action

Not directed at harming a specific individual.

this law isn’t directed at a specific individual

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

ok...and how does that appply here?

Legislative act...check
Singles out...check
fines=punishment w/o trial...check and Check.

Who does it single out?

My god you are stupid.
Internet platforms and information providers.
You know, just like DuhDumbass bragged.

Try reading some news sometime.

So laws against air pollution from coal fired generators are "singling out" utility companies?

You really are incredibly stupid.

Of course. Laws don't say you can't pollute. They say that if the amount of pollution exceeds X then you get fined Y. Companies then make their business decisions. Coal fired generators or smelting plants, all the same. As permitted by the EPA regulations passed by Congress and affirmed by the SCOTUS. Under that damned General Welfare clause.

This piece of crap? Sorry. 1, 10, and expostfacto.

Wanna try another stupid analogy?

Nope. They have specific regulations for coal fired power plants. For instance, the have rules regulating how tall the smoke stack has to be.

You're simply too stupid to waste time arguing with.

Then go be stupid elsewhere.
It'll be easy for you.

hahah please tell us all about a Bill of Attainder

Sorry. Not a history or law class. Try your local community college. Theyy accept 3rd grade dropouts,

hahaa

the sad thing is you are a product of our education system

 

[struth]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

Yes. That's generally how causes of action come about, unless they already existed at common law.

But those laws cannot be directed at specific individuals.
Article 1, Section 9.

hahaa it’s not a bill or attainer because it’s not convicting anyone of a crime

I'm sure your opinion is well respected in toilets around the country but it is wrong.

haha it’s not an opinion...it’s the definition

Here's your definition

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

Try reading.

It doesn't single out an individual or group, turd.

It not only singles out a group for punishment is selectively excludes a member of that group.

Just how stupid are you anyway?
They're bragging about how this bit of pandering is going to bring those nasty internet companies in line. How can you be so stupid as to claim the bill is not doing what its creators are claiming credit for it doing?

Geez, what a maroon!

huh? how does it do that

Try reading.
I'm sure there are site with the bill's details.

i did.

i assume it’s the same website you went to to learn what a bill or attainer was...hahaha

Really?
You went to a site on the Constitution or legal definitions to read up on DuhDumbass' bill?

Explains much

hahaa it’s clear you haven’t gone anywhere to learn about the things you are rambling about

It's clear you haven't the intelligence to go learn about the things you fail to comprehend.
Tiny brains have that impact you know.

oh i can comprehend you’re an idiot

 

[struth]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

govt can create cause of action

Not directed at harming a specific individual.

this law isn’t directed at a specific individual

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

ok...and how does that appply here?

Legislative act...check
Singles out...check
fines=punishment w/o trial...check and Check.

haha it singles out nobody

nor punishes anyone without them being found in violation via due process

Does
and Does

So there.

Geez.

show me where in the law it singles any one out specifically

GROUP DUMBASS!

since when can’t govt regulate an entire group? they do it all the time, from the diary industry, to tobacco, clothes, booze, etc

They can't. LOOK IT UP.

It can regulate milk
But I can't do so with the INTENT of harming a cow or a group of cows.

Geez.

they have regulations to protect consumers. If not completed with the farmer or business can be harmed via a fine etc

just like here

Regulations don't say "JOE SMITH" or "OWNERS OF BROWN COWS" do they?

Care to bet a 2 year ban on whether this is upheld?

this law doesn’t either

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

There's a place for lies, slander, dangerous medical advice, personal attacks and insane conspiracy theories. Maybe Conservative Treehouse or WMD would be appropriate for Trump.

maybe

but that doesn’t negate the fact that all that takes place on facebook and tweeter as well, and they shouldn’t be above the law and protected from liability

That's the point.. Facebook doesn't want the liability associated with lies, slander and bad medical advice. Trump needs to take that on himself.. He's trying to undermine the election process. Facebook doesn't want to be party to that.

Trump should take on the liability of his lies and conspiracy theories.

No, that's NOT the point, because Facebook doesn't currently face any liabilities associated with the content posted by its users. Basically, you're doing the same dishonest shit they're trying to: demanding that they get to act like publishers, while trying to cloak your bigotry in the mantle of "platform".

You have no business accusing anyone else of being a liar, given that you've never said a truthful word in all the time you've been spewing shit on this board. Oh, and the word "lie" is not defined as "saying things I don't like". Good to know that your knowledge of the English language is as extensive as your knowledge of the law.

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?

I think some folks didn't like it....what's your point? I am not seeing the connection here. Facebook is free to have requirements of their employees as well. Facebook employees can sue Facebook....just like Kap was free to sue the NFL.

what we however is talking about something different all together. We are talking about consumers being able to sue Facebook. Just like consumers are free to sue the New Yorker, or NY Times....why do you continue to think that Facebook should be immune, be treated differently and get better protections?

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.

How is allowing Facebook to be sued for cause "making a law intended to harm individuals?"

The "cause" doesn't exist. Only exists because a law was created for the express purpose of creating a cause SO FB could be sued and remember..."Corporations are people my friend."

govt can create cause of action

Not directed at harming a specific individual.

this law isn’t directed at a specific individual

A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

ok...and how does that appply here?

Legislative act...check
Singles out...check
fines=punishment w/o trial...check and Check.

haha it singles out nobody

nor punishes anyone without them being found in violation via due process

Does
and Does

So there.

Geez.

show me where in the law it singles any one out specifically

GROUP DUMBASS!

since when can’t govt regulate an entire group? they do it all the time, from the diary industry, to tobacco, clothes, booze, etc

They can't. LOOK IT UP.

It can regulate milk
But I can't do so with the INTENT of harming a cow or a group of cows.

Geez.

they have regulations to protect consumers. If not completed with the farmer or business can be harmed via a fine etc

just like here

Regulations don't say "JOE SMITH" or "OWNERS OF BROWN COWS" do they?

Care to bet a 2 year ban on whether this is upheld?

You want to bet on whether this is deemed a Bill of Attainder? I will take that action all day long.