- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Jack Dorsey should be arrested for treason
Posted on 10/28/20 at 8:51 pm to Linoge
Posted on 10/28/20 at 8:51 pm to Linoge
quote:
He is a worthless piece of shite. No respect for the senate.
Lion Ted should have taken a pair of pliers and ripped that shite out of his nose.
To be honest with you, neither do I. You can add the House of Representatives the list too.
0
Posted on 10/28/20 at 8:56 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
quote:
These companies are the public square.
They aren’t.
quote:
They have only repeatedly lied and said that they do not censor the right.
LINK
Posted on 10/28/20 at 8:58 pm to David_DJS
quote:
How much did they pay him? (honest question, I never heard/read)
No one knows, it hasn’t been disclosed, but the course of the litigation strongly suggests a nuisance settlement. No on coughs up “millions” that quickly.
Posted on 10/28/20 at 8:59 pm to cwill
quote:
They aren’t.
They are
quote:
LINK
frick a blind link
Posted on 10/28/20 at 9:01 pm to cwill
230 is applied to various platforms to determine their tax exempt status. Does Chicken get tax breaks for TD?
230 won't be revoked across the internet. It should be revoked for companies that claim not to censor free speech but do.
Chicken does not such thing.
230 won't be revoked across the internet. It should be revoked for companies that claim not to censor free speech but do.
Chicken does not such thing.
Posted on 10/28/20 at 9:08 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
quote:
They are
Is this just your feeling?
quote:
frick a blind link
Top 10 performing links on FB.
Posted on 10/28/20 at 9:16 pm to Ollieoxenfree99
Full text:
Where’s the tax break?
TD is not a “free speech” platform. It bans speech that is legal and bans posters who have made comments TD has determined to be disagreeable.
quote:
(a) Findings
The Congress finds the following:
(1) The rapidly developing array of Internet and other interactive computer services available to individual Americans represent an extraordinary advance in the availability of educational and informational resources to our citizens.
(2) These services offer users a great degree of control over the information that they receive, as well as the potential for even greater control in the future as technology develops.
(3) The Internet and other interactive computer services offer a forum for a true diversity of political discourse, unique opportunities for cultural development, and myriad avenues for intellectual activity.
(4) The Internet and other interactive computer services have flourished, to the benefit of all Americans, with a minimum of government regulation.
(5) Increasingly Americans are relying on interactive media for a variety of political, educational, cultural, and entertainment services.
(b) Policy
It is the policy of the United States—
(1) to promote the continued development of the Internet and other interactive computer services and other interactive media;
(2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation;
(3) to encourage the development of technologies which maximize user control over what information is received by individuals, families, and schools who use the Internet and other interactive computer services;
(4) to remove disincentives for the development and utilization of blocking and filtering technologies that empower parents to restrict their children’s access to objectionable or inappropriate online material; and
(5) to ensure vigorous enforcement of Federal criminal laws to deter and punish trafficking in obscenity, stalking, and harassment by means of computer.
(c) Protection for “Good Samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material
(1) Treatment of publisher or speaker
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.
(2) Civil liability
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—
(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or
(B) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).[1]
(d) Obligations of interactive computer service
A provider of interactive computer service shall, at the time of entering an agreement with a customer for the provision of interactive computer service and in a manner deemed appropriate by the provider, notify such customer that parental control protections (such as computer hardware, software, or filtering services) are commercially available that may assist the customer in limiting access to material that is harmful to minors. Such notice shall identify, or provide the customer with access to information identifying, current providers of such protections.
(e) Effect on other laws
(1) No effect on criminal law
Nothing in this section shall be construed to impair the enforcement of section 223 or 231 of this title, chapter 71 (relating to obscenity) or 110 (relating to sexual exploitation of children) of title 18, or any other Federal criminal statute.
(2) No effect on intellectual property law
Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or expand any law pertaining to intellectual property.
(3) State law
Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent any State from enforcing any State law that is consistent with this section. No cause of action may be brought and no liability may be imposed under any State or local law that is inconsistent with this section.
(4) No effect on communications privacy law
Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the application of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 or any of the amendments made by such Act, or any similar State law.
(5) No effect on sex trafficking law
Nothing in this section (other than subsection (c)(2)(A)) shall be construed to impair or limit—
(A) any claim in a civil action brought under section 1595 of title 18, if the conduct underlying the claim constitutes a violation of section 1591 of that title;
(B) any charge in a criminal prosecution brought under State law if the conduct underlying the charge would constitute a violation of section 1591 of title 18; or
(C) any charge in a criminal prosecution brought under State law if the conduct underlying the charge would constitute a violation of section 2421A of title 18, and promotion or facilitation of prostitution is illegal in the jurisdiction where the defendant’s promotion or facilitation of prostitution was targeted.
(f) Definitions
As used in this section:
(1) Internet
The term “Internet” means the international computer network of both Federal and non-Federal interoperable packet switched data networks.
(2) Interactive computer service
The term “interactive computer service” means any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or services offered by libraries or educational institutions.
(3) Information content provider
The term “information content provider” means any person or entity that is responsible, in whole or in part, for the creation or development of information provided through the Internet or any other interactive computer service.
(4) Access software provider
The term “access software provider” means a provider of software (including client or server software), or enabling tools that do any one or more of the following:
(A) filter, screen, allow, or disallow content;
(B) pick, choose, analyze, or digest content; or
(C) transmit, receive, display, forward, cache, search, subset, organize, reorganize, or translate content.
Where’s the tax break?
quote:
It should be revoked for companies that claim not to censor free speech but do.
TD is not a “free speech” platform. It bans speech that is legal and bans posters who have made comments TD has determined to be disagreeable.
Posted on 10/28/20 at 9:26 pm to cwill
quote:
Is this just your feeling?
They would claim in these multiple hearings being held that they can censor anyone they choose to if they were not. They have repeatedly abused their powers to censor only one political party. This should scare the shite of everyone.
If they were censoring any other group they would have already suffered consequences for their actions.
I have seen the censorship in real time so I don't need some list of facebook bs.
Posted on 10/28/20 at 9:27 pm to cwill
quote:
No on coughs up “millions” that quickly.
What a ridiculous thing to say. No one does huh? Sandmann had CNN dead to rights. Video evidence was clear that they targeted that kid, manipulated the video, and then proceeded to defame his character. It was exposed and they settled to avoid embarrassment.
"No one."
Posted on 10/28/20 at 9:43 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
quote:
They would claim in these multiple hearings being held that they can censor anyone they choose to if they were not.
So it is your feeling.
quote:
If they were censoring any other group they would have already suffered consequences for their actions.
Again your feels.
quote:
I have seen the censorship in real time so I don't need some list of facebook bs.
Consistently the top 10 most shared links on FB are from conservatives, but your anecdata and feels prevail.
Posted on 10/28/20 at 9:46 pm to cwill
It's section 2 regarding liabilities. I misspoke re: tax breaks. Currently FB and Twitter are protected via this clause and can't be sued for their censorship.
Posted on 10/28/20 at 9:47 pm to Iron Lion
I'd rather he be put into a wood chipper
Posted on 10/28/20 at 9:48 pm to BoarEd
quote:
What a ridiculous thing to say. No one does huh? Sandmann had CNN dead to rights.
They showed the initial video from one cam wasn’t the full situation. That cnn was guilty of bad journalism but not that they were liable for defamation or libel. Also media cos are known for vigorously fighting these claims. Also consider the Elon musk v diver case that in my view was pretty clear defamation. Sandman’s super lawyer lost that case! But I defer to you boared and your years of legal practice and familiarity with how the law works - like section 230.
Posted on 10/28/20 at 9:49 pm to Ollieoxenfree99
quote:
It's section 2 regarding liabilities. I misspoke re: tax breaks.
Posted on 10/28/20 at 10:00 pm to cwill
quote:
Abigail Marone Flag of United States
@abigailmarone
Jack Dorsey of Twitter just told Senator Cruz that anyone could now share the NY Post’s bombshell stories on Twitter.
Dorsey is lying.
Twitter is STILL blocking the URL for the NY Post story about the Biden’s foreign corruption & China dealings.
Twitter Video
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News