Re:Twitter says it will restrict retweeting world leaders wh...
by coldtea on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @04:56AM
(#21268384)
>Dominance is irrelevant, and a law based on that would be completely unreasonable.
Actually that's exactly how monopoly law works, checking dominance in a market.
It's also not different from the subtle laws (even in US) for determining religion or cult.
>Twitter might be popular today, next year it could be something else.
That's not a problem at all, as a law could e.g. cover all social media companies "above a certain user threshold".
>And how would you even define "social media" in a way that would pass Constitutional muster?
I don't really need to pass U.S Constitutional muster, as I'm speaking about E.U. That said, I'm pretty sure if US legislators wanted it, they could find a way. They have defined what's journalism, they could also define what's social media. Or they could extend the law to all media.
Actually that's exactly how monopoly law works, checking dominance in a market.
It's also not different from the subtle laws (even in US) for determining religion or cult.
>Twitter might be popular today, next year it could be something else.
That's not a problem at all, as a law could e.g. cover all social media companies "above a certain user threshold".
>And how would you even define "social media" in a way that would pass Constitutional muster?
I don't really need to pass U.S Constitutional muster, as I'm speaking about E.U. That said, I'm pretty sure if US legislators wanted it, they could find a way. They have defined what's journalism, they could also define what's social media. Or they could extend the law to all media.