Google accused of ‘double standard’ for punishing publishers for user comments

Re:Google accused of ‘double standard’ for punishing publish... by rbecker on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @06:50PM (#24487639)

> Racism is hate speech, and hate speech is not a form of protected speech.

You mean in the US? If so, which Supreme Court case are you basing this on?

Edit: As dextralt pointed out, I ask not because I expect HN posts to adhere to scientific journal standards, but because that claim is contrary to every Supreme Court decision in recent history, so I have trouble figuring out how you got that idea.

Edit 2: As dextralt's post is now flagged, let me reproduce what they cited:

Hate speech in the United States is not regulated due to the robust right to free speech found in the American Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that hate speech is legally protected free speech under the First Amendment. The most recent Supreme Court case on the issue was in 2017, when the justices unanimously reaffirmed that there is effectively no "hate speech" exception to the free speech rights protected by the First Amendment. -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_in_the_United_Stat...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google accused of ‘double standard’ for punishing publish... by floatingatoll on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @08:55PM (#24488473)

Please use HN’s reply feature to reply at HN. I do not reply to edit-replies as you’re using. I view them as a form of conversational warfare.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google accused of ‘double standard’ for punishing publish... by rbecker on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @09:14PM (#24488579)

I would if I could - my posts were rate-limited. It seems to only take 1-2 downvotes to get rate-limited to 2 posts/hour or less.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google accused of ‘double standard’ for punishing publish... by floatingatoll on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @09:39PM (#24488723)

You'll want to email the mods about that, using the footer Contact link.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google accused of ‘double standard’ for punishing publish... by floatingatoll on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @07:10PM (#24487783)

I didn't think this would be needed in this post, but since you've asked for advice on the law —

Disclaimer: I am not your lawyer, I have not prepared citations for your review, please seek legal counsel if you’re considering actions based on my opinion, etc etc.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google accused of ‘double standard’ for punishing publish... by dextralt on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @07:27PM (#24487889)

Oh reeeeeeeeeeally? You didn't think it was "needed"?

>Hate speech in the United States is not regulated due to the robust right to free speech found in the American Constitution.[1] The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that hate speech is legally protected free speech under the First Amendment. The most recent Supreme Court case on the issue was in 2017, when the justices unanimously reaffirmed that there is effectively no "hate speech" exception to the free speech rights protected by the First Amendment.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google accused of ‘double standard’ for punishing publish... by dang on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @08:14PM (#24488211)

Please stop posting in the flamewar style to HN. We've asked you this before.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[ Parent | on HN ]