Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Fake news" isn't illegal. Piracy is.
There's plenty of illegal stuff on Twitter, too.
[deleted]
Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
41–50 of 335 posts
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same. If he is seditious you can get a court to issue an injunction very quickly, and if he isn't a private entity has no issue determining what a politician can say. As a German one thinks different about free speech than do most Americans. We know all too well where too much free speech leads and when in doubt let the courts decide because we love public peace. Putting a muzzle on someone is interfering with po…
His speech has not been restricted in any real way. He can call a press conference and communicate with every American within minutes.
People keep saying this, but how would that work? We've seen major broadcasting networks refuse to air his press conferences before. Aren't most big platforms with the ability to reach "every American" private companies that can do the same?
This is a genuine question - I do not watch a lot of news. Is there a government owned platform that I don't know about? I just looked into CSPAN a bit and it is a private organization, so couldn't they also just decide to not air things?
edit: I am referring to the claim that "He can call a press conference and communicate with every American within minutes." How?
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#43[deleted]
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#44Twitter has no business inserting itself into a dispute between Elbakyan and Elsevier et al. Few people would have issues if Twitter shut down the Sci-Hub account after they received a valid court order, but a private monopolist cannot be trusted to be the arbiter of what is permitted speech.
It's Twitter's own servers and they can choose who can use them or not. Permitted speech on the legal scope does not matter when talking about businesses.
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#45Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same. If he is seditious you can get a court to issue an injunction very quickly, and if he isn't a private entity has no issue determining what a politician can say. As a German one thinks different about free speech than do most Americans. We know all too well where too much free speech leads and when in doubt let the courts decide because we love public peace. Putting a muzzle on someone is interfering with po…
Well our laws and legal traditions are a bit different than Germany’s Basic Law and Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch. In our case Twitter’s private property rights trump the President’s rights. The President is the President and the President can always get a message out if he wants ; Twitter on the other hand is not obligated to serve as a medium of Government communications and if they had IP banned the White House and Capi…
Yes, but I think the problem is more that we have a massively connected society but are relying on the good will of corporations to provide that connectivity.
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#47Twitter has no business inserting itself into a dispute between Elbakyan and Elsevier et al. Few people would have issues if Twitter shut down the Sci-Hub account after they received a valid court order, but a private monopolist cannot be trusted to be the arbiter of what is permitted speech.
Twitter is a company. And banning decisions are made by specific people in it. And it's not like after banning Trump they will happily consider their job done and go stock shelves at Walmart for minimum wage. Oh no, they have tasted power and they will continue finding new targets because their cushy job literally depends on it.
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same. If he is seditious you can get a court to issue an injunction very quickly, and if he isn't a private entity has no issue determining what a politician can say. As a German one thinks different about free speech than do most Americans. We know all too well where too much free speech leads and when in doubt let the courts decide because we love public peace. Putting a muzzle on someone is interfering with po…
Why would Twitter request a court to issue an injunction to remove him from the platform that they own and control? They're fully able to do some without an injunction so I'm not sure any court would even deal with the case. IANAL
It's not about Twitter's ability to ban users it's about enabling them avoid a substantial expansion of their moderation responsibilities. Twitter considers it a positive thing to have transparent and relatively equitably-applied rules, and this is an obvious positive for its users, and society in general (given how central Twitter has become to national discourse). Capricious one-off expansions that are difficult to justify generally (or that would require massive increases in moderation that pretty much everyone would hate) are the last thing Twitter wants.
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#49It also shut down the account of the Russian-made vaccine Sputnik V today. Seems like they are taking too much upon themselves lately, aren't they? UPD: Access has been restored.
I just googled it and could open it in Twitter.
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#50[deleted]