Live data from Hacker News

Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

courtlistener.com

151–160 of 485 posts

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#151
post #80

Glenn Greenwald has been investigating the planning of the Capitol protests and says "it was largely done on Facebook". So far he hasn't been able to identify a single person who was arrested and active on Parler: > Do you know how many of the people arrested in connection with the Capitol invasion were active users of Parler? Zero. The planning was largely done on Facebook. This is all a bullshit pretext for silenci…

You mean the same Glenn Greenwald who said Authoritarianism in US has nothing do with Trump? [1]

[1] https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-threat-of-authoritarian...

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#152

Parler has a moderation policy and they don’t apply it. Content that promotes illegal activity is not protected free speech and is also prohibited by Parler’s policies. They selectively applied that moderation after they became popular with MAGA. Also, 4chan exists why can’t Parler find a host?

Afaik their entire stack is built using AWS services.

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#154

If you’re a business, do you really want to be on a provider that can pull your card with little to no notice? That’s a lot of power. The boot is coming down hard right now. The cloud is looking like a risky bet.

It seems like there's at the very least a product-market fit for a cloud provider with less nebulous TOS. From the wording of the AWS contract, it sounds like the language is loose enough that any user can pretty much be terminated at whim.

If/when this lawsuit gets publicity, my guess is a lot of C-suite executives are gonna be looking over their shoulders and evaluating how screwed they'd be if their current cloud provider decided to deplatform them.

Amazon's probably counting on the fact that 99% of its customers' business doesn't have anything to do with politics, and therefore they'll write off the threat. But the counterpoint is that cancel culture has become so pervasive into people's personal lives that who knows what might happen.

If an executive shows up to a Trump-rally or posts a politically incorrect meme on his personal time, it's not outside the scope of possibility that AWS/GCP could demand that the company fire the person or else have their account terminated. The zeigeist is increasingly moving to the ideology that "silence is violence". Are companies, like Coinbase, that espouse political neutrality next?

Any company can now find itself on the wrong end of a cancel culture mob. If said mob has controls over your cloud providers TOS, then that's a major business risk.

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#156
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A terror attack was literally live streamed on Facebook.

Which one and why is live streaming (aka what TV news occasionally does) bad?

Christchurch shooting in New Zealand. It was stomach churning, don't watch it.

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#157
post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is whether that's legal, or anticompetitive

Anticompetitive? Is parler competing with amazon in any ways, shape or form?

A court can definitely rule on the clauses of a contract, about time someone made some case law here on modern software agreements

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#158
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were there actually a joint agreement not to compete for particular customers, there would be a case that it was a combination in restraint of trade.

Twitter doesn't do hosting, so it wouldn't 'compete' with AWS for customers? and AWS isn't a social media site?

> Twitter doesn’t do hosting, so it wouldn’t ‘compete’ with AWS for customers?

Sure, the place were an agreement of restraint of trade would be more simply possible would be something like Twitter/FB.

Though if you had a Twitter/FB pact and AWS was brought in and agreed to kick off Twitter/FB competitors that didn’t voluntarily join the Twitter/FB pact, AWS could be part of the scheme…

And a Twitter/AWS agreement alone along the same lines could be problematic, if Twitter alone had market power.

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#159

Parler has a moderation policy and they don’t apply it. Content that promotes illegal activity is not protected free speech and is also prohibited by Parler’s policies. They selectively applied that moderation after they became popular with MAGA. Also, 4chan exists why can’t Parler find a host?

> Also, 4chan exists why can’t Parler find a host?

They are trying to. The problem was that they were cut off by all of their services providers with next to no warning.

Post reply on HN