Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub

sciencemag.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 335 posts

Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub

#111

Post by tptacek »

sthnblllII wrote: post #101
tptacek wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything the court has done since Marsh v Alabama has walked that decision back, and I think you'll have a hard time finding legal experts to back the interpretation that Twitter owns the obligations of a public square. We've had threads about it on HN, but it's also (for obvious reasons) come up recently, and here's Ken White citing a recent SCOTUS decision knocking this idea down: https://twitter.com/Popehat/stat…

Laws can, do and need to change as technology changes the political reality. No one elected twitter. Building a pretty website should not give a private entity the power to control political speech.

I was going to rebut this, but thought better of it. My point is just, there's not much you can do with the jurisprudence as it exists, despite what you might think Marsh means.

Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub

#112

Post by kennywinker »

mc32 wrote: post #104
HarryHirsch wrote: post #11

Twitter 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.

Agree. They’re not violating copyright via Twitter. They should have a voice via Twitter, no matter the accusation. Do accused murderers [as opposed to convicted] get their Twitter suspended? This is ridiculous.

For that matter, should convicted murderers get their accounts suspended? I think not solely on the grounds that they’ve committed murder - but maybe if they are using their platform to cause further harm.

Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub

#113

Post by inglor_cz »

jenwkejnwjkef wrote: post #94
dickbar wrote: post #22

This move is bold and refreshing. I think Facebook and Amazon should also be taking action (assuming sci hub is using AWS and people are posting links to it on FB and organizing groups). It’s only fair that, in case of breach of any law, regardless of where it comes from, that same measures be applied in each and every case. I’m sure HN would agree given what has transpired over the last week. Edit: I missed to inclu…

Sci-hub is not breaking any laws. They are accused of breaking laws. Who gave Twitter, in your eyes, the power to act as a judge?

Judge, jury and executioner at the same time.

Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub

#114

Post by noncoml »

Instead of arguing who, when and why should Twitter ban someone, we should be trying to find a way to stop depending on Twitter, FB and Google for our voices to be heard.

Banning Trump may seem like a good idea in vacuum, but it's a slippery slope. And before you say that the cases are different, my point is that it shouldn't be up to Twitter to decide.

By supporting Trump's ban, we support Twitter to be the arbitrator of free speech.

We either have to treat Twitter as a private company, they can do what even the fuck they want, and hence we shouldn't have any saying, or treat it a public utility in which case only a judge can decided who gets banned and who doesn't

We cannot have it both ways, based on what we thing suits better our believes at the time.

Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub

#115

Post by Funes- »

It's funny. If a direct popular vote was held on making publicly-funded research freely available, it would pass by a staggering margin. Yet here we are, many easily-solvable issues ignored by government officials later, pretending representative democracy is a valid form of democracy.

Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub

#118

Post by bananabreakfast »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #11

Twitter 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.

In what world is Twitter a monopoly?

Its market cap is $36B. That's 2X less than Snap and 20X less than Facebook.

Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub

#119

Post by mc32 »

kennywinker wrote: post #112
mc32 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. They’re not violating copyright via Twitter. They should have a voice via Twitter, no matter the accusation. Do accused murderers [as opposed to convicted] get their Twitter suspended? This is ridiculous.

For that matter, should convicted murderers get their accounts suspended? I think not solely on the grounds that they’ve committed murder - but maybe if they are using their platform to cause further harm.

Yeah I don’t know the ins and outs of that. I only made a difference because felons lose rights in the penitentiary, but then again most who can are able to commercialize their stories, though sometimes the state steps in and diverts proceeds to victims, etc.
Post reply on HN