Parler loses court challenge.

The case has no merit

U.S. District Judge Barbara Rothstein in Seattle said Parler was unlikely to prove Amazon breached its contract or violated antitrust law by suspending service on Jan. 10, and that it was "not a close call."

She also forcefully rejected the suggestion that the public interest would be served by a preliminary injunction requiring Amazon Web Services to "host the kind of abusive, violent content at issue in this case, particularly in light of the recent riots at the U.S. Capitol."
Click to expand...

Until November 4, 2020 conservatives spent entire careers raging against the scourge of frivolous lawsuits.

For some weird reason, in the last 10 weeks, conservatives have become the biggest fans of frivolous lawsuits on the whole planet.
 
Cypress said:
Until November 4, 2020 conservatives spent entire careers raging against the scourge of frivolous lawsuits.

For some weird reason, in the last 10 weeks, conservatives have become the biggest fans of frivolous lawsuits on the whole planet.
Click to expand...

How do you define "frivolous" lawsuit?
 
Red Jenkins said:
I wonder why the left is so intent on controlling the narrative. Why not let things be and let the American people decide what they want to believe? Why is that a problem for the left?
Click to expand...

Parler controlled the speech. They booted leftys off so fast that it was clear, they wanted only right-wing hate speech. That is anathema to free speech.
 
Tacomaman said:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...o-have-service-restored-by-amazon/ar-BB1cYvKR

Maybe they can resurface as "tRump tv"? Or maybe more appropriately
"Chump TV".
Click to expand...

Fake News. This case will most likely be appealed. This judge is obviously biased. The ruling is ridiculous. Amazon itself had part in it's users inciting insurrection and riots. It must therefore ban itself by its own reasoning. Further. by making Parler responsible for the content of its users, Amazon likewise should be held accountable for the content of each of its users and for each book or movie it sells. By it's own reasoning, it no longer has any valid claim to Section 230.

The same is true of Google (and Youtube and Android).

The same is true of Apple.

Further, the judge has exposed herself to criminal and civil charges for openly violating the law, including Section 230, and Washington contract law.
 
Red Jenkins said:
I wonder why the left is so intent on controlling the narrative. Why not let things be and let the American people decide what they want to believe? Why is that a problem for the left?
Click to expand...

For the simple reason that 'the left' cannot afford the truth or open discussions. It cannot afford dissidence. It must be brutally quashed.

But dissidence doesn't go away. This is the mistake all socialists make.
 
Cypress said:
Until November 4, 2020 conservatives spent entire careers raging against the scourge of frivolous lawsuits.

For some weird reason, in the last 10 weeks, conservatives have become the biggest fans of frivolous lawsuits on the whole planet.
Click to expand...

Suing Amazon for violation of contract law is a legitimate case. It is not frivolous.
 
Nordberg said:
Parler controlled the speech.
Click to expand...
Nope. A baldfaced lie. You are describing what DEMOCRATS are trying to do.
Nordberg said:
They booted leftys off so fast that it was clear, they wanted only right-wing hate speech.
Click to expand...
Parler didn't boot any liberal for being a liberal. It is DEMOCRATS making hate speech. They've made it about Trump for FIVE YEARS. So have YOU.
Nordberg said:
That is anathema to free speech.
Click to expand...
Inversion fallacy. It is DEMOCRATS that are shutting out users for political opinions. It is DEMOCRATS that are trying to shut down Parler. It won't work. Parler is already coming back online, independent of YOUR desire to quash it. YOU don't control the internet. Amazon doesn't either. Neither does Google. Neither does Apple. All these idiots are doing is killing their own business.
 
Into the Night said:
For the simple reason that 'the left' cannot afford the truth or open discussions. It cannot afford dissidence. It must be brutally quashed.

But dissidence doesn't go away. This is the mistake all socialists make.
Click to expand...

The left has for forty years made the mistaking of believing that if they could control all conversations in polite society then they could regulate minds to their liking....They never paid enough attention to Jung.....driving the ideas that they dont like underground both makes them harder to track and makes them more dangerous....these clods are both stupid and abusive....not a great combo.
 
Red Jenkins said:
I wonder why the left is so intent on controlling the narrative. Why not let things be and let the American people decide what they want to believe? Why is that a problem for the left?
Click to expand...

I guess wanting facts and proof to reign is bad? You have no problem with stations or sites spewing propaganda? Many think that is dangerous to the Republic.
 
Into the Night said:
Fake News. This case will most likely be appealed. This judge is obviously biased. The ruling is ridiculous. Amazon itself had part in it's users inciting insurrection and riots. It must therefore ban itself by its own reasoning. Further. by making Parler responsible for the content of its users, Amazon likewise should be held accountable for the content of each of its users and for each book or movie it sells. By it's own reasoning, it no longer has any valid claim to Section 230.

The same is true of Google (and Youtube and Android).

The same is true of Apple.

Further, the judge has exposed herself to criminal and civil charges for openly violating the law, including Section 230, and Washington contract law.
Click to expand...

Listen closely my little twat. You are about as close to being an attorney, a legal expert, as is my mailman. Please dont pretend you have a fucking clue, cause you dont and never have and definitely never will.
 
Nordberg said:
I guess wanting facts and proof to reign is bad? You have no problem with stations or sites spewing propaganda? Many think that is dangerous to the Republic.
Click to expand...

Well biden said that democrats prefer truth to facts. What I especially like is you believe only the left has "facts and proof". It never occurs to you that you could be mistaken. That's really an intellectually lazy position to take. Sorry to say but it is.
 
Red Jenkins said:
I wonder why the left is so intent on controlling the narrative. Why not let things be and let the American people decide what they want to believe? Why is that a problem for the left?
Click to expand...

Trump was threatening to remove the 203 exemption. Then, if somebody like Rudy told those big lies about Dominion on Facebook it could have been sued.
 
Flash said:
Trump was threatening to remove the 203 exemption. Then, if somebody like Rudy told those big lies about Dominion on Facebook it could have been sued.
Click to expand...

It's idiotic to hold facebook responsible for the views of another person but that's irrelevant to my point. The left has decided what is true and what isn't. I actually have no problem with that what I have a problem with is their belief that what they have decided is true is actually true. They are not at all the same thing.
 
Red Jenkins said:
It's idiotic to hold facebook responsible for the views of another person but that's irrelevant to my point. The left has decided what is true and what isn't. I actually have no problem with that what I have a problem with is their belief that what they have decided is true is actually true. They are not at all the same thing.
Click to expand...

Doesn't the right do the same thing? They decided it was true the election was fraudulent and that antifa is responsible for the Capitol attack. The left decided the opposite. In this case the left has the truth on their side since the right was fighting to preserve power and would say anything. In other cases the left is guilty of the lies.
 
Flash said:
Doesn't the right do the same thing? They decided it was true the election was fraudulent and that antifa is responsible for the Capitol attack. The left decided the opposite. In this case the left has the truth on their side since the right was fighting to preserve power and would say anything. In other cases the left is guilty of the lies.
Click to expand...

The left wasn't trying to retain the power it got through the election so you're claiming they had no reason to lie? Seriously????
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top