After social media app Parler dropped its federal case against Amazon Web Services for abruptly cutting off its web-hosting services, the company filed a separate lawsuit against Amazon and its web services unit in a Washington state court, according to court documents from late Tuesday.
The Parler website and apps went dark in January as many service providers pulled back support, accusing it of failing to police violent content. Google removed the application from its Play Store and Apple from the App Store.
The new lawsuit filed by Parler, which was first reported by NPR, accused Amazon of defamation and breach of contract.
Amazon has said that Parler ignored repeated warnings to effectively moderate the growth of violent content on its website… Parler, however, said there was a lack of evidence that it had a role in inciting the pro-Trump riots in U.S. Capitol and argued that it was unfair to deprive millions of law-abiding Americans a platform for free speech.
MacDailyNews Note: Parler’s Community Guidelines state, “Our goal is to provide all community members with a welcoming, nonpartisan Public Square. While the First Amendment does not apply to private companies such as Parler, our mission is to create a social platform in the spirit of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
We prefer that removing users or user-provided content be kept to the absolute minimum. We prefer to leave decisions about what is seen and who is heard to each individual. In no case will Parler decide what will content be removed or filtered, or whose account will be removed, on the basis of the opinion expressed within the content at issue. Parler’s policies are, to use a well-known concept in First Amendment law, viewpoint-neutral.”
Read more here.
Parler deserves to win this case.
Forbes reviewed data from the Program on Extremism at the George Washington University, which has collated a list of more than 200 charging documents filed in relation to the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol. In total, the charging documents refer to 223 individuals in the incident investigation. Of those documents, 73 reference Facebook.
That’s far more references than other social networks.
YouTube was the second most-referenced on 24. Instagram, a Facebook-owned company, was next on 20. Parler, the app that pledged protection for free speech rights, was mentioned in just eight (8).
Facebook was not banned by “Big Tech” even though the company was responsible for 93 incidents, 12X those on Parler.
Parler was censored by Big Tech which looks for any excuse to stifle ideas with which they do not agree such as trade deals that benefit America, low taxes, de-regulation, strong borders, merit-based immigration, smaller federal government, personal freedom, strong law enforcement, Second Amendment rights, strong military, good jobs, strong families, and safe communities.
Details aka facts are passe in today’s world, especially online
Of course FB et al have more incidents – they are far more widely used. So the # of incidents is not material to your weak argument.
Effective or not (and we all know it’s not), FB, Twitter etc. all at least make (lame and pathetic) attempts to remove objectionable/illegal content such as calling for the overthrow of the US government when they are made aware of it. Parler deliberately ignored those warnings from Amazon.
Further, Amazon, as a corporation, has the right to do business with those they wish. If someone walks into my store and keeps pissing on the floor after I ask them to stop and after showing them the contract they signed that says “I promise not to piss on the floor”, I have the right to throw them out even though my store is open to the public.
Parler deserves to lose because they are just another example of a company that believes they aren’t bound by the same rules as others and they don’t need to be accountable for their actions. Snowflake whiners. The company depriving its users is Parler, not Amazon.
Forbes reviewed data from the Program on Extremism at the George Washington University, which has collated a list of more than 200 charging documents filed in relation to the siege. In total, the charging documents refer to 223 individuals in the Capitol Hill riot investigation. Of those documents, 73 reference Facebook. That’s far more references than other social networks. YouTube was the second most-referenced on 24. Instagram, a Facebook-owned company, was next on 20. Parler, the app that pledged protection for free speech rights and garnered a large far-right userbase, was mentioned in just eight.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2021/02/07/sheryl-sandberg-downplayed-facebooks-role-in-the-capitol-hill-siege-justice-department-files-tell-a-very-different-story/?sh=14f2f1bd10b3
Whilst the data doesn’t show definitively what app was the most popular amongst rioters, it does strongly indicate Facebook was rioters’ the preferred platform. Previously, Forbes had reported on cases where Facebook users had publicly posted their intention to attend the riots. One included the image of a bullet with the caption, “By Bullet or Ballot, Restoration of the Republic is Coming.” The man who posted the image was later arrested after posting images of himself at the Capitol on January 6, according to investigators. In other cases, the FBI found Facebook users had livestreamed their attack on the building.
…… Other platforms and technology companies, from Apple and Google to Parler, have been furnishing the feds with data on users who were at the riots.
Actual facts vs JimBobs lies
marxist lie!
7 Twitter Accounts That Have Promoted Violence But Haven’t Been Banned
https://www.dailywire.com/news/7-twitter-accounts-that-have-promoted-violence-but-havent-been-banned
Brutal Truth made a compelling case.
“Of course FB et al have more incidents – they are far more widely used.” So, does that EXCUSE what there are doing on a larger scale?
You just made the perfect case of widespread abuse of et al apps should be REMOVED.
Standing by for your apologist “weak argument”…
Brutal Truth, indeed. Excellent post and facts shows the bias of Big Social Media Tech and the Mindless Media and sycophants in the Democrat Party…
As a company the First Amendment does not apply. As the provider of a service, Amazon, Google and Apple are well with their legal rights to discourage, warn and then remove users who reflect poorly upon their image by using their portal. Imagine having a billion dollar investment in employees, equipment and image go down because your name becomes synonymous with hate speech!
The difficulty begins when you mix your “Low taxes, de-regulation ($17,000 power bills, anyone?), strong borders, merit-based immigration, smaller federal government, personal freedom, strong law enforcement, Second Amendment rights, strong military, good jobs, strong families, and safe communities” with lets take over the government, hang our duly elected representatives and kill police.
BTW, First Amendment keeps other bad things from happening, like yelling fire in a crowded theatre.
Enough about rights, and lets start uniting, not inciting.
“Unite” behind a babbling vegetable who has to be protected from answering questions from the press?
“Unite” like you did behind President Trump?
Fuck no, dumb ass.
Harvard University and Harris Insights and Analytics Poll Results, February 23-35, 2021:
● 55% of Americans disapprove of Biden’s order requiring schools to allow biological boys who identify as girls into girls’ sports and vice versa.
● 55% disapprove of Biden’s decision to reduce deportations of those illegally present in the United States who do not pose a national security threat.
● 53% disapprove of Biden’s decision to kill the Keystone XL and the associated jobs.
● 50% disapprove of Biden’s decision to repeal President Trump’s travel ban on countries like Somalia and Syria
● 64% believe the Jan 6. storming of the U.S. Capitol was “being used by politicians to suppress legitimate political movements.”
● 64% believe the Democrat’s cancel culture “is a threat to our freedom.”
“● 64% believe the Democrat’s cancel culture “is a threat to our freedom.”
What about Republican’s cancel culture? Is is OK when iPOTUS told his followers to boycott an American company because of a perceived slight to his fragile ego? Remember when Mr. Trump told his followers to boycott Goodyear because they wouldn’t allow MAGA hats on the job? (They didn’t allow ANY hats on the job.) Then there was Harley Davidson, Apple, CNN, Macy’s, Rolling Stone, HBO, to name a few American companies the vindictive former president wanted to destroy. I also recall iPOTUS calling for boycotts of Mexico and Italy. I guess it’s OK when it’s the Chosen One who’s personally offended and revenge is necessary, not so much when it’s a whole group of people.
The “chosen one” is right to speak out against companies that play poitics and discriminate against Trump supporters and a red hat?
But its OK to ban the greatest children author of all time Dr. Suess perceived slights to cancel culture fragile egos and leftist snowflakes?
Your post is one sided PARTISAN and HYPOCRITICAL as usual…
I wish Paler would just go away….and bring GoeB and Hal along with them. Let’s make America a Moron-free zone!
Whoops, meant Parler….hate autocorrect
Hey Buster, go pee on a fire hydrant. Your comments are WORTHLESS, as USUAL…
Americans don’t “unite” with treasonous libturds.
Indeed…
You worried ’bout leaving a better planet for our kids
How ’bout leaving better kids for our planet?
I think the elites are real but they ain’t drinking babies’ blood
They’re creating chaos so they have something to save you from