McBell
Unbound
Are you going to change your tune when Parler loses or are you going to do the same as you did when Trump lost?Actually no. Amazon is now being sued for breach of contract. And you still supported my position by the site your quoted.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Parler is shut down completely
- Thread starter Cooky
- Start date
Your posted site.
When you block posters or when Amazon blocked THEIR constituent - Parler - they were trampling on the First Amendment.
At least in "my view".
Cooky
Veteran Member
Not at all....
Parler is back up again.
really..? Wow, maybe I'll go check it out.
McBell
Unbound
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that blocking constituents on social media is a Freedom of Speech violation.
So your view is not what matters in any lawsuit.
Now all you need to do is look up and understand the definition of the word constituent.
Hint, Parler is NOT a constituent of Amazon.
McBell
Unbound
Parler's website suddenly reappeared online Sunday afternoon with a message from its CEO, John Matze: "Hello world, is this thing on?"
The message, dated January 16, implies that the social network popular with members of the far right has found a new online hosting platform, after Parler was booted from Amazon Web Services on January 10 in the wake of the Capitol siege.
Parler's domain is now registered with Epik, according to a WHOIS search. Epik is a company that sells domain names and is also the domain registrar for Gab, an alternative social network often used by members of the far-right. It remains unclear who is Parler's web host; Parler didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
Parler's website shows signs of life with a brief message to 'lovers and haters' - CNNThe message, dated January 16, implies that the social network popular with members of the far right has found a new online hosting platform, after Parler was booted from Amazon Web Services on January 10 in the wake of the Capitol siege.
Parler's domain is now registered with Epik, according to a WHOIS search. Epik is a company that sells domain names and is also the domain registrar for Gab, an alternative social network often used by members of the far-right. It remains unclear who is Parler's web host; Parler didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
McBell
Unbound
Parler’s website shows signs of life but mobile apps remain offline
PUBLISHED MON, JAN 18 20218:39 AM EST / UPDATED MON, JAN 18 20218:45 AM EST
The website of Parler — a social media platform popular with conservatives and supporters of President Donald Trump — is back online, albeit in a very limited form.
...
While the Parler website is no longer completely offline, it’s still experiencing technical difficulties and Parler users can’t use it in the way that they did previously.
...
While the Parler website is no longer completely offline, it’s still experiencing technical difficulties and Parler users can’t use it in the way that they did previously.
McBell
Unbound
This case is not about suppressing speech or stifling viewpoints. It is not about a
conspiracy to restrain trade. Instead, this case is about Parler’s demonstrated unwillingness and
inability to remove from the servers of Amazon Web Services (“AWS”) content that threatens
the public safety, such as by inciting and planning the rape, torture, and assassination of named
public officials and private citizens. There is no legal basis in AWS’s customer agreements or
otherwise to compel AWS to host content of this nature. AWS notified Parler repeatedly that its
content violated the parties’ agreement, requested removal, and reviewed Parler’s plan to address
the problem, only to determine that Parler was both unwilling and unable to do so. AWS
suspended Parler’s account as a last resort to prevent further access to such content, including
plans for violence to disrupt the impending Presidential transition.
Despite Parler’s rhetoric, its lawsuit is no more than a meritless claim for breach of
contract. But the facts are unequivocal: If there is any breach, it is Parler’s demonstrated failure
and inability to identify and remove such content. AWS was well within its rights to suspend
Parler immediately for those failures. Parler also cannot hold AWS liable in tort for enforcing
the agreement’s express terms. And there is no antitrust claim where, as here, Parler cannot
plausibly plead an agreement to cause it harm and the complained-of conduct is undeniably
compatible with a legitimate purpose.
Source - PDF of the court documentconspiracy to restrain trade. Instead, this case is about Parler’s demonstrated unwillingness and
inability to remove from the servers of Amazon Web Services (“AWS”) content that threatens
the public safety, such as by inciting and planning the rape, torture, and assassination of named
public officials and private citizens. There is no legal basis in AWS’s customer agreements or
otherwise to compel AWS to host content of this nature. AWS notified Parler repeatedly that its
content violated the parties’ agreement, requested removal, and reviewed Parler’s plan to address
the problem, only to determine that Parler was both unwilling and unable to do so. AWS
suspended Parler’s account as a last resort to prevent further access to such content, including
plans for violence to disrupt the impending Presidential transition.
Despite Parler’s rhetoric, its lawsuit is no more than a meritless claim for breach of
contract. But the facts are unequivocal: If there is any breach, it is Parler’s demonstrated failure
and inability to identify and remove such content. AWS was well within its rights to suspend
Parler immediately for those failures. Parler also cannot hold AWS liable in tort for enforcing
the agreement’s express terms. And there is no antitrust claim where, as here, Parler cannot
plausibly plead an agreement to cause it harm and the complained-of conduct is undeniably
compatible with a legitimate purpose.
I wouldn't. And I'm saying this non-partisanly. Parler was a horribly managed website by IT standards. Their data breaches, as well as the amount of personal data they kept on file, was so bad it'd make Facebook blush.
It doesn't scrub location data and even required driver's license numbers at one point.
Great for FBI tracking down criminals. Not so great for everyone else.
Thanks for the update... apparently they are resolving some technical difficulties.... but they do have a hosting platform now
Martin
Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
Scary. Or: @rightwingnutjobs?
McBell
Unbound
Judge Refuses To Reinstate Parler After Amazon Shut It Down
U.S. District Judge Barbara Rothstein sided with Amazon, which argued that Parler would not take down posts that threatened public safety even in the wake of the attack on the U.S. Capitol, and that it is within Amazon's rights to punish the company over its refusal.