Rep Nunes sues Twitter for Anti-Conservative Bias

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can't wait for the countersuit and corresponding discovery.

I love liberals when they defend corporate interests vs Democratic institutions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't wait for the countersuit and corresponding discovery.

I love liberals when they defend corporate interests vs Democratic institutions.

PP is doing neither. PP is supporting Nunes’s action and hoping for further litigation to really get at the truth.

[Anonymous]

Nunes’s lawyer has an EarthLink.net email address.

[Anonymous]

Hey, if bakers don't have to bake cakes for gay couples, then why should Twitter have to cater to conservatives?

[Anonymous]

Twitter is a platform and is not responsible for what people do on the platform. I mean, that is why the let Trump lie all the time and foment anger, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nunes’s lawyer has an EarthLink.net email address.

Stay on topic, my friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nunes’s lawyer has an EarthLink.net email address.

Stay on topic, my friend.

The topic is Nunes’s lawsuit.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

This attorney and contributor to those liberal rags The Federalist and the Washington Examiner is not impressed.
https://twitter.com/gabrielmalor/status/1107781500970377216?s=21

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Twitter needs to be regulated as a public utility under common carrier laws.

It's time to strip these companies away from the individuals who control them now.

So Twitter should be a common carrier (and stripped of safe harbor protections to stop IP theft) but an ISP should not? Do you not realize the massive hypocrisy and contradictions inherent in those 3 "conservative" positions?

If an ISP is "curating" content then it should loose its safe harbor protections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Twitter needs to be regulated as a public utility under common carrier laws.

It's time to strip these companies away from the individuals who control them now.

So Twitter should be a common carrier (and stripped of safe harbor protections to stop IP theft) but an ISP should not? Do you not realize the massive hypocrisy and contradictions inherent in those 3 "conservative" positions?

If an ISP is "curating" content then it should loose its safe harbor protections.

Says who? YouTube “curates” out all of the ISIS videos. Should they stop doing that? Facebook removed 1.1 million copies of the New Zealand killer’s video of the massacre of 50 people. Should they not do that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Twitter needs to be regulated as a public utility under common carrier laws.

It's time to strip these companies away from the individuals who control them now.

So Twitter should be a common carrier (and stripped of safe harbor protections to stop IP theft) but an ISP should not? Do you not realize the massive hypocrisy and contradictions inherent in those 3 "conservative" positions?

If an ISP is "curating" content then it should loose its safe harbor protections.

If an ISP is selectively denying service to liberals (or conservatives), I hope we would ALL be up in arms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Twitter needs to be regulated as a public utility under common carrier laws.

It's time to strip these companies away from the individuals who control them now.

So Twitter should be a common carrier (and stripped of safe harbor protections to stop IP theft) but an ISP should not? Do you not realize the massive hypocrisy and contradictions inherent in those 3 "conservative" positions?

If an ISP is "curating" content then it should loose its safe harbor protections.

Says who? YouTube “curates” out all of the ISIS videos. Should they stop doing that? Facebook removed 1.1 million copies of the New Zealand killer’s video of the massacre of 50 people. Should they not do that?

Says the courts when dealing with the DMCA. In recent years the courts have ruled on provisions of the DMCA originally intended for ISPs and copyright infringement and applied them to social media, stripping them of safe harbor protections.

My personal opinion is that they should not delete the video, ugly as it may be. I am a free speech advocate and Facebook acts as a public square.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Twitter and DCUM have same standards

So true. But DCUM is a private company. Jeff can delete any posts he wants.

Twitter is a public company and a major media platform. It is essentially a public utility company and needs to be regulated as such.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Twitter and DCUM have same standards

So true. But DCUM is a private company. Jeff can delete any posts he wants.

Twitter is a public company and a major media platform. It is essentially a public utility company and needs to be regulated as such.

OMG “public company” doesn’t mean what you think it does. Just because it’s listed on the stock exchange doesn’t mean it doesn’t get to set its own rules.