Parler sues Amazon for antitrust violation, breach of contract and unlawful business interference. Wants Judge to force site to be reinstated.

[ZippyTheOtter]

Conversations over this situation will reveal who the true liberals are, and who the true fascists are.

Feel free to expand on that, because I don't follow.

 

[IntentionalPun]

IP is beating me to the punch lately.

But yeah, look into government contracts. It's all Amazon, Microsoft, or Google.

There are other less self-service hosts that are big enough as well.

But I don't think Parler has the tech team/funding to handle that.

 

[showernota]

Looks like they found an alternative with Epik, which is what Gab uses.

Parler finds refuge with right-leaning webhosting service

A handful of Big Tech companies moved to take down social media platform Parler over the weekend, but it appears to have found a new company to help try to keep its website running.

www.washingtonexaminer.com

 

[ZippyTheOtter]

There are other less self-service hosts that are big enough as well.

But I don't think Parler has the tech team/funding to handle that.

I don't think you're attacking me. Sorry if I implied that.

I was saying that you've taken over as a knowledge expert in certain areas here, and I want to shake your hand

 

[NickFire]

Feel free to expand on that, because I don't follow.

Google the definition of liberal.

 

[ZippyTheOtter]

Looks like they found an alternative with Epik, which is what Gab uses.

Parler finds refuge with right-leaning webhosting service

A handful of Big Tech companies moved to take down social media platform Parler over the weekend, but it appears to have found a new company to help try to keep its website running.

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Oh boy, Wikipedia alone is

Epik is an ICANN-accredited domain registrar and web hosting company known for providing services to websites that host far-right, neo-Nazi, and other extremist content

 

[ZippyTheOtter]

Google the definition of liberal.

So you don't have a point, or don't care to actually defend it. Cool.

Edit: Sorry for double, timing worked out that way

 

[NickFire]

So you don't have a point, or don't care to actually defend it. Cool.

Edit: Sorry for double, timing worked out that way

So your lack of knowledge as to a word's meaning, or inability to do 1 second of research before criticizing someone, means I don't have a point or am scared to defend it?

That's one hell of a leap man.

 

[IntentionalPun]

I don't think you're attacking me. Sorry if I implied that.

I was saying that you've taken over as a knowledge expert in certain areas here, and I want to shake your hand

Hah, oh I know.. didn't think you were attacking me.

Was just chiming in with a bit more info lol

This place is a little more bearable to me now that some of the craziness has subsided and EviLore has banned it. It's a much more balanced forum for sure. It was kind of a nightmare to express anything remotely left or "right" here before. (I'm a mix.. I'm like a non-emotional SJW lol, I don't believe in harassing/violence/dumb as hell hastags that require way too much nuance to explain) So yeah expect to see more of me

/back to my enterprise architecture assessment

 

[ManaByte]

He's lying here BTW.. or wrong at least about nobody being on Parler.

Havig a Parler account =/= being an "active user".

 

[njr]

Viva Frei thinks Parler has a good case, it could be likely that AWS has to reinstate their account in the interim as they would find a sustainable long term solution to minimize harm.

 

[CGiRanger]

Viva Frei thinks Parler has a good case, it could be likely that AWS has to reinstate their account in the interim as they would find a sustainable long term solution to minimize harm.

The note that stood out to me was supposedly the Contract stipulated that Amazon was required to give Parler 30 days to cure any violations, where as Amazon in this case dropped them under 24 hours.

 

[gamerMan]

Don't think there is a case here. Parler violated Amazon's terms of service.

According to Deadline, Amazon made its concerns known to Parler over a number of weeks and during that time Amazon saw a significant increase in this type of dangerous content, not a decrease, which led to the suspension.

 

[Valued Gamer]

Don't think there is a case here. Parler violated Amazon's terms of service.

According to Deadline, Amazon made its concerns known to Parler over a number of weeks and during that time Amazon saw a significant increase in this type of dangerous content, not a decrease, which led to the suspension.

Apparently none of those arrested over the riots used Parler. They used Facebook to communicate.

 

[Mahadev]

Apparently none of those arrested over the riots used Parler. They used Facebook to communicate.

Yet Amazon hasn't boycotted facebook yet. Hmmm strange... It's as if the tech industry is a monopoly where they help each other to destroy competition.

Which btw shows how wrong libertarians and many conservatives are about the "free" market, the market will never be free, it'll always be manipulated by a few rich fucks that collude with each other to protect their interests.

 

[Madonis]

Also:

 

[Ricky_Bee]

Also:

Progressives have wished death on men and white people all day every day on twitter for... decades? now.

I’d swear they think no one can read what they post.

 

[CGiRanger]

Progressives have wished death on men and white people every day on twitter for... decades? now.

I was going to say these threats seem so tame compared to what I've seen fermenting on Twitter and Facebook over all these years continuing to now.

 

[Ricky_Bee]

I was going to say these threats seem so tame compared to what I've seen fermenting on Twitter and Facebook over all these years continuing to now.

Some animals are more equal than others, you know?

 

[shoplifter]

I was told three times this didn't violate Facebook TOS

 

[haxan7]

Also:

If Parler wasn't even making efforts to moderate and remove that content, I don't think they're going to do well in court.

 

[azz0r]

Conversations over this situation will reveal who the true liberals are, and who the true fascists are.

Amazon don't want to host a service which has murder threats on it every second, they are within their rights to cancel their contract if Parler won't step up and clean its platform up.

 

[CGiRanger]

Amazon don't want to host a service which has murder threats on it every second, they are within their rights to cancel their contract if Parler won't step up and clean its platform up.

Yet Amazon Hosts Twitter?

Or do you think that Twitter has really "cleaned up" its platform?

 

[Raven117]

Read again.

Section 7.2(b)(ii)



Section 6



Breach of Section 4.2



Definition of "Policies" in Section 14



Amazon Web Services Acceptable Use Policy

AWS Acceptable Use Policy

aws.amazon.com

Parler doesn't have a case.

This was a good walk through the contract. Parlor still has a case for breach of contract though. As you can argue from your analysis of Section 4.2 onward. Regardless,, I like where your head is at.

They won't win. The court system is corrupt to the core.

Excuse me? Are you implying that the Federal Court system is "corrupt to the core." Do you have one ounce of evidence about this? Or are you just mad that some decisions didn't go the way you wanted them to?

I'm tired of all this bullshit. Its not accurate. And its dangerous for people to think that the rule of law does not control. It does. Our courts are far from corrupt.

 

[Ricky_Bee]

Amazon don't want to host a service which has murder threats on it every second

Don’t twitter have their own servers?

This was a good walk through the contract. Parlor still has a case for breach of contract though. As you can argue from your analysis of Section 4.2 onward. Regardless,, I like where your head is at.




Excuse me? Are you implying that the Federal Court system is "corrupt to the core." Do you have one ounce of evidence about this? Or are you just mad that some decisions didn't go the way you wanted them to?

I'm tired of all this bullshit. Its not accurate. And its dangerous for people to think that the rule of law does not control. It does. Our courts are far from corrupt

It’s kind hard to Western courts aren’t just a weapon to be wielded by rich people against the plebeians after all he court cases brought against things like Brexit

 

[Raven117]

It’s kind hard to Western courts aren’t just a weapon to be wielded by rich people against the plebeians after all he court cases brought against things like Brexit

What?

 

[spandexmonkey]

I hope Amazon wins this because it'll bring further glory to the party. Once this has been established I think it'll be much easier for us to move towards making party affiliation (a non protected class) a requirement for service. Say you're company or hospital is using AWS/Azure/Paypal or any other party affiliated organization, but your hiring practices and business associations do not enforce adherence to the party's rules, yank the service. We can decide what those rules are later, thats not important. Most of these non-party approved businesses don't have the infrastructure to survive without the larger B2B services. The only alternatives will be to associate with white supremacists, easy for us to publically shame them further. This will force them to fall in line with our party and ensure a bright future.

 

[Ricky_Bee]

What?

UK. After the establishment lost the EU referendum they attempted to litigate it. Like... years of... everyone not now banned on twitter... lawyers, judges, our Supreme Court, Parliament, the media... cheering on the efforts. That were only really successful because in the end people voted decisively for Brexit half a dozen times.

See also how all efforts to Build The Wall or anything else Trump wanted to do being stopped by activist lawyers and judges.

Western courts are a weapon to be wielded against us by out betters, just as twitter and amazon and the FBI and the rest are.

 

[spandexmonkey]

UK. After the establishment lost the EU referendum they attempted to litigate it. Like... years of... everyone not now banned on twitter... lawyers, judges, our Supreme Court, Parliament, the media... cheering on the efforts. That were only really successful because in the end people voted decisively for Brexit half a dozen times.

See also how all efforts to Build The Wall or anything else Trump wanted to do being stopped by activist lawyers and judges.

Western courts are a weapon to be wielded against us by out betters, just as twitter and amazon and the rest are.

C'mon man, the courts aren't that bad, they're not even really necessary. Binding arbitration is awesome.

 

[Ricky_Bee]

C'mon man, the courts aren't that bad, they're not even really necessary. Binding arbitration is awesome.

They are pretty bad. You could read the twitter accounts of the UKs Supreme Court as they gloated about ruling against the Brexit.

 

[Sparhavoc]

This was a good walk through the contract. Parlor still has a case for breach of contract though. As you can argue from your analysis of Section 4.2 onward. Regardless,, I like where your head is at.




Excuse me? Are you implying that the Federal Court system is "corrupt to the core." Do you have one ounce of evidence about this? Or are you just mad that some decisions didn't go the way you wanted them to?

I'm tired of all this bullshit. Its not accurate. And its dangerous for people to think that the rule of law does not control. It does. Our courts are far from corrupt.

Why go through countless evidence when democrats just gaslight and lie through their teeth. The entire political system is corrupt of course the courts are.

I'm also tired. I learned a while back that there is no reason to argue with the side of the left they will invent things if need be to support their argument.

 

[Ornlu]

Parler's death throes. They're going to struggle to win this case, because (a) Amazon will have better lawyers than them, and (b) they already agreed to the TOS when they signed up. They should've just agreed to improve their moderation. This is when keeping it real goes wrong.

They were not given time to improve moderation. They were given less than 1 day to respond before being removed.

Oh boy, Wikipedia alone is

Are you criticizing a company for making a choice that they were forced into? It's not like they had options with Big Tech throwing threats at anyone and everyone.

If Parler wasn't even making efforts to moderate and remove that content, I don't think they're going to do well in court.

They did make efforts, just as every other company does. Theirs just used a user report system, rather than an AI driven blanket ban/report mechanism.

Excuse me? Are you implying that the Federal Court system is "corrupt to the core." Do you have one ounce of evidence about this? Or are you just mad that some decisions didn't go the way you wanted them to?

I'm tired of all this bullshit. Its not accurate. And its dangerous for people to think that the rule of law does not control. It does. Our courts are far from corrupt.

I've never read a single positive assessment of our Federal Court system from anyone who has had extensive contact working with it. There are many ways that it is fundamentally broken. It's not an uncommon opinion, at all. Especially amongst people who work within/around it.

 

[Raven117]

UK. After the establishment lost the EU referendum they attempted to litigate it. Like... years of... everyone not now banned on twitter... lawyers, judges, our Supreme Court, Parliament, the media... cheering on the efforts. That were only really successful because in the end people voted decisively for Brexit half a dozen times.

See also how all efforts to Build The Wall or anything else Trump wanted to do being stopped by activist lawyers and judges.

Western courts are a weapon to be wielded against us by out betters, just as twitter and amazon and the FBI and the rest are.

You haven't quoted one solitary shred of evidence how any of this is corrupt. Not one. Do you even understand how law works? The way you write, I'm starting to think you are a bot.

Why go through countless evidence when democrats just gaslight and lie through their teeth. The entire political system is corrupt of course the courts are.

I'm also tired. I learned a while back that there is no reason to argue with the side of the left they will invent things if need be to support their argument.

Do you know what "corruption" even is? Politics is one thing. We can discuss what all that means. However, you show me....none of this sweeping generalization bullshit about how the Federal Court System is "corrupt to its core."

Fucking prove it. Instead of spouting off some half cocked conjecture where you obviously don't know a damn thing about it.

 

[Raven117]

I've never read a single positive assessment of our Federal Court system from anyone who has had extensive contact working with it. There are many ways that it is fundamentally broken. It's not an uncommon opinion, at all. Especially amongst people who work within/around it.

All these people huh?

Fundamentally broken? How so. What's broken? This broad conjecture bullshit is tiresome. What is fundamentally broken? What is fundamentally corrupt.

 

[Sparhavoc]

You haven't quoted one solitary shred of evidence how any of this is corrupt. Not one. Do you even understand how law works? The way you write, I'm starting to think you are a bot.


Do you know what "corruption" even is? Politics is one thing. We can discuss what all that means. However, you show me....none of this sweeping generalization bullshit about how the Federal Court System is "corrupt to its core."

Fucking prove it. Instead of spouting off some half cocked conjecture where you obviously don't know a damn thing about it.

You demand evidence but bring nothing yourself. Do you really believe that court will be fair to Trump?

 

[Ricky_Bee]

Do you even understand how law works?

Near as I can see, rich people hire expensive lawyers to bring cases, sympathetic judges rule in their favour and then they all gloat about it on twitter.

And I mean, the proof is right there on twitter. I defy you to read the twitter account of a judge or lawyer or journalist or such for six months and not come to the conclusion they are bent.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

If Parler wasn't even making efforts to moderate and remove that content, I don't think they're going to do well in court.

That's the thing I've been saying and I've been grilled for it in this forum: online platforms are full of shit and filth it's part and parcel of the business of hosting content online but you got to show to be a reliable partner, have moderator programs, algorithmic filters and so on to try to mitigate.

If your host comes and says "hey we're worried about what's on your website, what are you doing" and you come up empty handed you're toast. When I saw that Linn Wood tweet stay up 5 days and they didn't manually nuke it I knew they were done for.

 

[Ricky_Bee]

That's the thing I've been saying and I've been grilled for it in this forum: online platforms are full of shit and filth it's part and parcel of the business of hosting content online but you got to show to be a reliable partner, have moderator programs, algorithmic filters and so on to try to mitigate.

If your host comes and says "hey we're worried about what's on your website, what are you doing" and you come up empty handed you're toast. When I saw that Linn Wood tweet stay up 5 days and they didn't manually nuke it I knew they were done for.

Again though, you can report the endless hatred of white people that progressives post on twitter as much as you want and they never do a thing about it.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Again though, you can report the endless hatred of white people that progressives post on twitter as much as you want and they never do a thing about it.

You can parrot your line man, I explained to you how things work and why parler got (probably) nuked.

You do you.

 

[Raven117]

You demand evidence but bring nothing yourself. Do you really believe that court will be fair to Trump?

Im not the one with the burden of proof that courts are "corrupt to the core." I can't prove a negative that they are not corrupt to the core. Don't be daft.

I 100% believe that a Court will be fair to Trump. If anything, Courts will likely favor Trump due to his soon to be prior position as POTUS. There is not one shred of evidence you have pointed to that would dictate otherwise.

Near as I can see, rich people hire expensive lawyers to bring cases, sympathetic judges rule in their favour and then they all gloat about it on twitter.

And I mean, the proof is right there on twitter. I defy you to read the twitter account of a judge or lawyer or journalist or such for six months and not come to the conclusion they are bent.

You show me where a United States Federal Judge on Twitter spoke about a ruling and "gloating." Lawyer or journalist...neither proves your point.

The way you write, I'm not kidding, are you a bot?

 

[Ricky_Bee]

You can parrot your line man, I explained to you how things work and why parler got (probably) nuked.

You do you.

Well, it’s bleeding obvious. You can call for violence, plot insurrections and post bigotry on twitter all you want so long as it’s bigotry the mods agree with.

 

[Ricky_Bee]

Im not the one with the burden of proof that courts are "corrupt to the core." I can't prove a negative that they are not corrupt to the core. Don't be daft.

I 100% believe that a Court will be fair to Trump. If anything, Courts will likely favor Trump due to his soon to be prior position as POTUS. There is not one shred of evidence you have pointed to that would dictate otherwise.


You show me where a United States Federal Judge on Twitter spoke about a ruling and "gloating." Lawyer or journalist...neither proves your point.

The way you write, I'm not kidding, are you a bot?

I’m not a bot. I’m just slightly Autistic

(Possibly fairly autistic.)

 

[Ornlu]

All these people huh?

Fundamentally broken? How so. What's broken? This broad conjecture bullshit is tiresome. What is fundamentally broken? What is fundamentally corrupt.

Sorry, I assumed you had some knowledge of the Federal Courts based on your assertion. As I said, there are many ways that it is fundamentally broken. Would you like to go through the area of political appointments (or politicization of the courts in general), as a starter? That seems like an area with pretty obvious flaws.

Some good background info articles (picking a wide variety):

FBI raid on Trump’s attorney is so political, it would have made J. Edgar Hoover blush

Consider the source.

thehill.com

Politicization of the Justice Department - American Oversight

www.americanoversight.org

United States federal judicial district - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

If you want to go in-depth with me about the courts, I'd be happy to in PMs. As it is though, we'd be derailing a good bit beyond the scope of this thread.

 

[Sparhavoc]

Im not the one with the burden of proof that courts are "corrupt to the core." I can't prove a negative that they are not corrupt to the core. Don't be daft.

I 100% believe that a Court will be fair to Trump. If anything, Courts will likely favor Trump due to his soon to be prior position as POTUS. There is not one shred of evidence you have pointed to that would dictate otherwise.


You show me where a United States Federal Judge on Twitter spoke about a ruling and "gloating." Lawyer or journalist...neither proves your point.

The way you write, I'm not kidding, are you a bot?

Time will prove this to be wrong. The establishment have already shown their cards.

 

[Raven117]

I’m not a bot. I’m just slightly Autistic

(Possibly fairly autistic.)

??? okay.

Sorry, I assumed you had some knowledge of the Federal Courts based on your assertion. As I said, there are many ways that it is fundamentally broken. Would you like to go through the area of political appointments (or politicization of the courts in general), as a starter? That seems like an area with pretty obvious flaws.

Some good background info articles (picking a wide variety):

FBI raid on Trump’s attorney is so political, it would have made J. Edgar Hoover blush

Consider the source.

thehill.com

Politicization of the Justice Department - American Oversight

www.americanoversight.org

United States federal judicial district - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

If you want to go in-depth with me about the courts, I'd be happy to in PMs. As it is though, we'd be derailing a good bit beyond the scope of this thread.

Sorry, I assumed you knew the difference between a Federal Court and the Department of Justice. I appreciate the effort you found with the links. But really, you are off base here.

Time will prove this to be wrong. The establishment have already shown their cards.

No, it will be wrong to you only if somehow the Court rules in a way you don't like. You have shown that you have absolutely zero understanding of the Federal Courts, how law works, what charges, if any, will be brought against Trump, the merits of those charges, if any.

There is no "showing the cards." I don't even know what this means. (I know what the phrase means).

Regardless, to Ormlur points, we are getting outside the scope of the thread here.

I'll leave it simply as this, please don't swallow the lure regarding that all of the systems of the United States are corrupt. They aren't. Some bad apples? Sure, we are all human, but fundamentally US institutions are not corrupt and are filled with normal people just trying to run the country. In particular, the Federal Judiciary takes its job exceedingly seriously. They understand that with the Executive and the Legislative branches being elected officials, they have play a critical role in balancing the separation of powers, and other critical legal decisions.

To not believe in our Federal Court system is to not believe in the rule of law. The belief in the rule of law is all we have that keeps this Democracy afloat. Democracy only works because we believe it works. To erode this believe is to weaken our country and the democracy. Something our enemies will absolutely love.

 

[Ricky_Bee]

??? okay.

Well, if you think I’m weird it’s probably that. It tends to be

 

[Ornlu]

Sorry, I assumed you knew the difference between a Federal Court and the Department of Justice. I appreciate the effort you found with the links. But really, you are off base here.

You think the two have no contact with each other? I don't understand what you are trying to say here, at all.

 

[Ricky_Bee]

.To not believe in our Federal Court system is to not believe in the rule of law. The belief in the rule of law is all we have that keeps this Democracy afloat. Democracy only works because we believe it works. To erode this believe is to weaken our country and the democracy. Something our enemies will absolutely love.

Well, I might argue this is one reason it is bad western institutions have become so obviously just weapons to be wielded by the elite against the proles.

Again in the UK the BBC is so clearly a mouthpiece for the London elite, the courts and police so clearly weapons for the London elite. Universities progressive boot camps hell bent on deplatforming political enemies.

You know. How can you expect someone to look at the NYT, the paper of record, a great western institution, and not recognise it to be a weapon to be wielded against the enemies of the rich?

It also kind of sucks to be a prole and have your state so clealy weaponised against you.

Western institutions just don't deserve respect. I agree that is bad. But they still do not deserve respect.

 

[Sparhavoc]

??? okay.

Sorry, I assumed you knew the difference between a Federal Court and the Department of Justice. I appreciate the effort you found with the links. But really, you are off base here.

No, it will be wrong to you only if somehow the Court rules in a way you don't like. You have shown that you have absolutely zero understanding of the Federal Courts, how law works, what charges, if any, will be brought against Trump, the merits of those charges, if any.

There is no "showing the cards." I don't even know what this means. (I know what the phrase means).

Regardless, to Ormlur points, we are getting outside the scope of the thread here.

I'll leave it simply as this, please don't swallow the lure regarding that all of the systems of the United States are corrupt. They aren't. Some bad apples? Sure, we are all human, but fundamentally US institutions are not corrupt and are filled with normal people just trying to run the country. In particular, the Federal Judiciary takes its job exceedingly seriously. They understand that with the Executive and the Legislative branches being elected officials, they have play a critical role in balancing the separation of powers, and other critical legal decisions.

To not believe in our Federal Court system is to not believe in the rule of law. The belief in the rule of law is all we have that keeps this Democracy afloat. Democracy only works because we believe it works. To erode this believe is to weaken our country and the democracy. Something our enemies will absolutely love.

There are no winners here. To believe in the law of rule it must be applied equally. Which it is not considering the BLM riots got a free pass and bail out funds.

The ones not believing in the rule of law are the ones not applying it equally. And they are going to be the next government.

Democracy has no chance to thrive in a system of hypocrisy. Democracy is just a word for democrats it seems.

 

[Ixiah]

Wow, people actualy defend Amazon, who totaly have no connection to Twitter, no, there is no illegal vertical Monopoly here.......
And everything i read on these "evidence" posts, you can read on Twitter as well, way more, way worse, so....what is their argument here ?
I hope this goes to court, fuck these morons.