Whitehouse Congress Petition Protect Free Speech in the Digital Public Square

Whitehouse.gov ^ | 8/28/2018 | W.C.

[BraveMan]

This seems like stepping on a rake, as in not a good idea.

[MortMan]

The solution is pretty easy. If these monopolistic social media platforms engage in one-sided policing, their indemnity for content posted by users is removed.

Hit them in the wallet.

[MortMan]

Definitionally incorrect. Both government and private enterprise censor. However, the government does so illegally, according to the first amendment.

[Lazamataz]

This seems like stepping on a rake, as in not a good idea.

Odd comment.

Okay, so you don't want to. No worries.

[Nifster]

I usually don’t.....

Today done and done

[MarchonDC09122009]

Laz, you are the best.

[Lazamataz]

Thanks bro!

[Lazamataz]

Laz, you are the best.

Meh. I'll do, until The Best finally gets here. :)

[NobleFree]

Requiring them to *NOT CENSOR* is not a regulation.

Requiring ANYTHING is most certainly a regulation (font size notwithstanding).

[NobleFree]

The power to control communications

That power has been and remains with information consumers, who have freely chosen to make heavy use of certain company's offerings.

[NobleFree]

The biggest cartel is the government. If you don’t like facebook, you don’t have to be on facebook. If you don’t like twitter, you can leave twitter. But if the government is in your face, you have to financially support it, and you cannot argue with a policeman, even if he’s abusing his power.

THIS!

It's what statists of the left and right refuse to acknowledge and do their best to obfuscate.

[NobleFree]

Personally, I think it would be great if Jim let DUers post over here.

Should the government REQUIRE Jim to do so? That's where this petition points.

[Drew68]

Should the government REQUIRE Jim to do so? That's where this petition points.

Free Republic is a forum, not a platform. Apples and oranges. Twitter banning users engaged in perfectly legal speech would be more akin to those old switchboard operators disconnecting phone calls because they didn't approve of the conversations.

[GOPJ]

bump to the top

[MarchonDC09122009]

Thanks to everyone who’s signed the petition it’s gone from 5k to 18k in the first day since posted on Whitehouse.gov.
100,000 signatures are needed asap!

Jim and Mods just this one time for awareness sake, can you Please keep this big tech anti-censorship post at the top of Frontpage News?

Lets prove that Conservatives value free speech more than the left values shutting us down.
Thank you

[BraveMan]

I did anyway; not the first bad idea I’ve followed.

My concern is the effect something like this will have on sites like Free Republic.

[Lazamataz]

Glad you did it, and this will merely make the big boys behave.

[MarchonDC09122009]

FR is a forum and NOT a social MEDIA platform.

Fakebook, Google, Twitter are All SOCIAL MEDIA Platforms.

Anti-trust legal precident has already been set, internationally at least.

Google has been successfully fined BILLIONS for rigging their search engine.

https://www.wired.com/story/dont-expect-big-changes-from-europes-record-google-fine/

[NobleFree]

Free Republic is a forum, not a platform. There's a significant difference between the two, including that platforms are afforded protections under the DMCA that other websites are not.

I don't see how FR doesn't fall under (c):

"The four safe harbors [from DMCA] provided by Congress, in the following subsections of Section 512, {FN72: 17 U.S.C. §512} are:

"(a) Transitory digital network communications
(b) System caching
(c) Information residing on systems or networks at the direction of users
(d) Information location tools" - http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise33.html

What are the other alleged "significant differences" you claim?

[Travis McGee]

I did it.