Florida Gov. DeSantis Has Just Signed A Bill Into Law That Would Allow Everyday Floridians To Sue Big Tech Platforms For Monetary Damages

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

It's not a free speech issue.

It 100% is a free speech issue. Everything we are talking about relates to speech.

Everything we are talking about relates to a contractual relationship between social media and users.

 

[bripat9643]

The test if a business has min contacts to establish personal jurisdiction over a business, comes out of International Shoe Co. v Washington:

(1) The nonresident defendant must do some act or consummate some transaction with the forum or perform some act by which he purposefully avails himself of the privilege of conducting activities in the forum, thereby invoking the benefits and protections[;] (2) the claim must be one which arises out of or results from the defendant's forum-related activities[; and] (3) exercise of jurisdiction must be reasonable

So when Facebook puts itself out on the internet, and ask for money for ads...from says Disney...it's satisfied the test.

Then they can go after Disneyland--not Facebook. Facebook doesn't ask for ads, companies contact Facebook to do business with them. Now if it's a Florida company, then yes, they can make regulations of that Florida based company. They can't dictate to Facebook or Twitter how they will run their company because a Florida based company decided to do business with them.

They can control the ads that are presented in FL, which means all of them since Facebook isn't likely to prevent ads from displaying only in FL.

 

[colfax_m]

Ex Post Facto

They’ve had the policy about vaccines since October 2020.

Right. Ex Post Facto.

And they don’t have the right to take down content after the fact?

They do. That’s freedom of speech.

 

[bripat9643]

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs law to hold Big Tech companies accountable for content moderation practices

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday signed a measure that he says will protect state residents from Silicon Valley’s “power grab on speech, thought and content.”

www.foxbusiness.com

Smile

So do we have a right to post on privately owned platforms? I don't think the SCOTUS is going to agree with that.

Do you have a right to make calls on a privately owned cellular service?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Ex Post Facto

They’ve had the policy about vaccines since October 2020.

Right. Ex Post Facto.

And they don’t have the right to take down content after the fact?

They do. That’s freedom of speech.

That's breech of contract and deceptive trade when done BEFORE a change in the TOS.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We'll see about that.

Indeed we will. Tests in court are quite different from partisan voting and showmanship of a retarded governor.

 

[colfax_m]

Everything we are talking about relates to a contractual relationship between social media and users.

Nope. That’s how they’re trying to hide the issue. They’re whitewashing it.

But it’s about the freedom of speech. Everything posted on social media is speech in one form or another.

 

[Faun]

They can't discriminate based on idelogy alone, nor should they be allowed to.

Why not? It’s their website.

For the same reason AT&T can not.

Wrong.

you think AT&T can discriminate? Sorry...https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/chapter-5/subchapter-II/part-I

(a)Charges, services, etc.
It shall be unlawful for any common carrier to make any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services for or in connection with like communication service, directly or indirectly, by any means or device, or to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, class of persons, or locality, or to subject any particular person, class of persons, or locality to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage.

LOLOLOLOL

So you think Facebook is a common carrier, huh?

Of course they are

What Is a Common Carrier? Definition, How They Work, and Examples

A common carrier is a private or public entity that transport goods or people. Unlike private carrier services, it is available to anyone willing to pay its fee.

www.investopedia.com

A common carrier is defined by U.S. law as a private or public entity that transports goods or people from one place to another for a fee. The term is also used to describe telecommunications services and public utilities.

After YOU posted the definition of a common carrier, which includes...

A common carrier is defined by U.S. law as a private or public entity that transports goods or people from one place to another for a fee. ​

... I can only presume you refuse to answer my question about how much does it cost to post on Facebook because that caused you to realize your own post with that definition utterly destroyed your claim that Facebook is a common carrier.

why did you cut off my quote? I find you lost all cred when you did that.

Here is the remainder of the quote for those paying attention at home "The term is also used to describe telecommunications services and public utilities."

Facebook et al aren't considered them now under the law, the issue presented and being discussed is treating them like one

LOL

You even admit the part I cut off is irrelevant. But I suppose you had to whine about something after embarrassing yourself like that.

lord not....it’s why they cii op is be common carriers

Of course you did. You pointed out Facebook isn't a telecommunication service or a public utility.

So now I see you whined about me cutting out irrelevancies as a diversion from you pointing out a requirement of a common carrier is paying them for their service whereas Facebook is free to members.

Currently they aren't regulated as such, but should be in my opinion, and appears to be the way things are headed...even the SCOTUS openly discussed it.

That's the point I was making.

No one cares what you want. The bottom line is Facebook is not a common carrier which even you unwittingly admitted when you posted a definition of a common carrier that includes thrre is a fee for such services.

That's why I asked you how much it costs to post on Facebook.

That's why you ignored that question.

Three times.

Because you can't bring yourself to admit Facebook isn't a common common carrier even though you yourself demonstrated they are not.

If it's not a common carrier, then it isn't protected by rule 230, and it can be sued. You can't seem to make up your mind whether it is a common carrier, or not.

And yet, it's not a common carrier by the definition of a common carrier.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs law to hold Big Tech companies accountable for content moderation practices

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday signed a measure that he says will protect state residents from Silicon Valley’s “power grab on speech, thought and content.”

www.foxbusiness.com

Smile

So do we have a right to post on privately owned platforms? I don't think the SCOTUS is going to agree with that.

Do you have a right to make calls on a privately owned cellular service?

Right. Contractual relationship. Kicking them off the cellular service is a breech.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Do you have a right to make calls on a privately owned cellular service?

Does my contract say I do, if I make my payments? then yes. And still they can terminate my contract at any time, per the riders.. How much did you pay for Facebook last month?

Do you think you have a right to post on USMB? To post whatever you like? Let's test that.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Everything we are talking about relates to a contractual relationship between social media and users.

Nope. That’s how they’re trying to hide the issue. They’re whitewashing it.

But it’s about the freedom of speech. Everything posted on social media is speech in one form or another.

Facebook is not government, remember?

 

[colfax_m]

That's breech of contract and deceptive trade when done BEFORE a change in the TOS.

Where in the TOS does it say they can’t take down content they deem problematic after the fact? Or change the TOS for that matter?

It doesn’t. In fact, the TOS say the opposite. It’s not deceptive and it’s not breech of contract.

If it were, there’d be enough grounds to sue for breach without this new law.

 

[colfax_m]

Facebook is not government, remember?

Indeed! They aren’t. That’s why they have their own right to their freedom of speech.

 

[bripat9643]

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs law to hold Big Tech companies accountable for content moderation practices

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday signed a measure that he says will protect state residents from Silicon Valley’s “power grab on speech, thought and content.”

www.foxbusiness.com

Smile

Good luck imposing laws on companies in other states.

So if you are on a Forum and live in Florida but it is run in New Jersey that would negate the law?

States can't dictate laws in other states. A person who breaks the law can only be charged by the state where the law was violated.

Sure FL can't dictate NJ law, but if a NJ business is doing business in FL it has to flow FL law...and since it's doing business in FL, FL has jurisdiction over the business

Florida has no jurisdiction over a business being run in another state.

Sure...but if they business avails itself to do business in FL it does. Please keep up.

Playing stupid is FAUXs favorite tactic.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Facebook is not government, remember?

Indeed! They aren’t. That’s why they have their own right to their freedom of speech.

That does not include a "right" to unilaterally breach contracts at will and be deceptive about it. Not a free speech issue.

 

[bripat9643]

Facebook is not government, remember?

Indeed! They aren’t. That’s why they have their own right to their freedom of speech.

And people have a right to sue it.

 

[Faun]

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs law to hold Big Tech companies accountable for content moderation practices

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday signed a measure that he says will protect state residents from Silicon Valley’s “power grab on speech, thought and content.”

www.foxbusiness.com

Smile

Good luck imposing laws on companies in other states.

So if you are on a Forum and live in Florida but it is run in New Jersey that would negate the law?

States can't dictate laws in other states. A person who breaks the law can only be charged by the state where the law was violated.

Sure FL can't dictate NJ law, but if a NJ business is doing business in FL it has to flow FL law...and since it's doing business in FL, FL has jurisdiction over the business

Florida has no jurisdiction over a business being run in another state.

Sure...but if they business avails itself to do business in FL it does. Please keep up.

Playing stupid is FAUXs favorite tactic.

Whereas you don't play around at all.

 

[colfax_m]

And people have a right to sue it.

They’ll lose because they have no legal argument.

 

[bripat9643]

They can't discriminate based on idelogy alone, nor should they be allowed to.

Why not? It’s their website.

For the same reason AT&T can not.

Wrong.

you think AT&T can discriminate? Sorry...https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/chapter-5/subchapter-II/part-I

(a)Charges, services, etc.
It shall be unlawful for any common carrier to make any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services for or in connection with like communication service, directly or indirectly, by any means or device, or to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, class of persons, or locality, or to subject any particular person, class of persons, or locality to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage.

LOLOLOLOL

So you think Facebook is a common carrier, huh?

Of course they are

What Is a Common Carrier? Definition, How They Work, and Examples

A common carrier is a private or public entity that transport goods or people. Unlike private carrier services, it is available to anyone willing to pay its fee.

www.investopedia.com

A common carrier is defined by U.S. law as a private or public entity that transports goods or people from one place to another for a fee. The term is also used to describe telecommunications services and public utilities.

After YOU posted the definition of a common carrier, which includes...

A common carrier is defined by U.S. law as a private or public entity that transports goods or people from one place to another for a fee. ​

... I can only presume you refuse to answer my question about how much does it cost to post on Facebook because that caused you to realize your own post with that definition utterly destroyed your claim that Facebook is a common carrier.

why did you cut off my quote? I find you lost all cred when you did that.

Here is the remainder of the quote for those paying attention at home "The term is also used to describe telecommunications services and public utilities."

Facebook et al aren't considered them now under the law, the issue presented and being discussed is treating them like one

LOL

You even admit the part I cut off is irrelevant. But I suppose you had to whine about something after embarrassing yourself like that.

lord not....it’s why they cii op is be common carriers

Of course you did. You pointed out Facebook isn't a telecommunication service or a public utility.

So now I see you whined about me cutting out irrelevancies as a diversion from you pointing out a requirement of a common carrier is paying them for their service whereas Facebook is free to members.

Currently they aren't regulated as such, but should be in my opinion, and appears to be the way things are headed...even the SCOTUS openly discussed it.

That's the point I was making.

No one cares what you want. The bottom line is Facebook is not a common carrier which even you unwittingly admitted when you posted a definition of a common carrier that includes thrre is a fee for such services.

That's why I asked you how much it costs to post on Facebook.

That's why you ignored that question.

Three times.

Because you can't bring yourself to admit Facebook isn't a common common carrier even though you yourself demonstrated they are not.

If it's not a common carrier, then it isn't protected by rule 230, and it can be sued. You can't seem to make up your mind whether it is a common carrier, or not.

And yet, it's not a common carrier by the definition of a common carrier.

So then people can sue it. What are you arguing about?

 

[bripat9643]

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs law to hold Big Tech companies accountable for content moderation practices

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday signed a measure that he says will protect state residents from Silicon Valley’s “power grab on speech, thought and content.”

www.foxbusiness.com

Smile

Good luck imposing laws on companies in other states.

So if you are on a Forum and live in Florida but it is run in New Jersey that would negate the law?

States can't dictate laws in other states. A person who breaks the law can only be charged by the state where the law was violated.

Sure FL can't dictate NJ law, but if a NJ business is doing business in FL it has to flow FL law...and since it's doing business in FL, FL has jurisdiction over the business

Florida has no jurisdiction over a business being run in another state.

Sure...but if they business avails itself to do business in FL it does. Please keep up.

Playing stupid is FAUXs favorite tactic.

Whereas you don't play around at all.

Wow. that was so clever.