Families of San Bernardino Shooting Sue Facebook, Google, Twitter
1–10 of 67 posts
Re: Families of San Bernardino Shooting Sue Facebook, Google, Twitter
#2Wait not suing Apple?
To clarify Apple refused to unlock the phone, thus I expected them to be a target of the lawsuit as well. Not saying they should have been sued or that this lawsuit has any merit.
Re: Families of San Bernardino Shooting Sue Facebook, Google, Twitter
#3There are all sorts of parallels between open Internet/encryption and the gun rights debate. It will be interesting to see how it all sorts out in the end. For example, in the future could we see a joint campaign by the NRA and the EFF?
Re: Families of San Bernardino Shooting Sue Facebook, Google, Twitter
#4Wait not suing Apple? To clarify Apple refused to unlock the phone, thus I expected them to be a target of the lawsuit as well. Not saying they should have been sued or that this lawsuit has any merit.
What did they do? All they did was refuse to unlock the perpetrator's phone. How do they have standing in that?
Re: Families of San Bernardino Shooting Sue Facebook, Google, Twitter
#5[deleted]
Re: Families of San Bernardino Shooting Sue Facebook, Google, Twitter
#6> [The lawsuit] asserts that by allowing Islamic State militants to spread propaganda freely on social media, the three companies provided "material support" to the group and enabled attacks such as the one in San Bernardino.
> A number of lawsuits have been filed in recent years seeking to hold social media companies responsible for terror attacks, but none has advanced beyond the preliminary phases.
Here's another recent example of this [0]. At first glance of the definition for material support [1], these lawsuits might seem (legally) reasonable. Luckily though, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act [2] makes these lawsuits fairly baseless. I can't imagine the consequences if social media providers were liable for all content posted on them... (Disclaimer: IANAL in the least)
[0]: http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-lawsuits...
[1]: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2339A
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communicati...
Re: Families of San Bernardino Shooting Sue Facebook, Google, Twitter
#7Good. It's high time. Misguided people are generally surrounded by misguided people. Therefore the like/retweet/view counters of their content over-amplifies whatever narrative is already in their heads. It's like watching a very badly trained neural network getting worse. They just don't have access to a good corrective mechanism.
I hold Facebook, Youtube and Twitter responsible for training a whole bunch of people to value their reactions over their ability to think.
Re: Families of San Bernardino Shooting Sue Facebook, Google, Twitter
#8Wait not suing Apple? To clarify Apple refused to unlock the phone, thus I expected them to be a target of the lawsuit as well. Not saying they should have been sued or that this lawsuit has any merit.
What did they do? All they did was refuse to unlock the perpetrator's phone. How do they have standing in that?
If they are sueing for allowing ISIS propaganda to be spread on Social Media, they might as well sue for not policing iMessage as well, I guess.
Re: Families of San Bernardino Shooting Sue Facebook, Google, Twitter
#9That's like suing the coffee shops for the revolution
Re: Families of San Bernardino Shooting Sue Facebook, Google, Twitter
#10Wait not suing Apple? To clarify Apple refused to unlock the phone, thus I expected them to be a target of the lawsuit as well. Not saying they should have been sued or that this lawsuit has any merit.
What did they do? All they did was refuse to unlock the perpetrator's phone. How do they have standing in that?
They enabled the perpetrator's planning and communications by supplying him the phone. I mean, they are just as culpable as Facebook, Google and Twitter...
...i.e. not at all, but a large and wealthy company to try and extort a settlement from.