Sorry, but I think you are being highly disingenuous. An ACTUAL equivalency would be a phone company throwing you off their phone system, while colluding with other phone companies and tech companies (not even related to the phone service) to also simultaneously ban you from using their services. Also, this is clearly politically targeted, while using words that hide this. Otherwise, please explain to me how all of them just up and decided to do this at once?

We as a society have said that is not ok for phone companies to do. Why are we making exceptions for what is now services that are holding a large portion, if not the majority, of online sites and services at this time?

Also, what evidence has been presented of illegal activity on this app and proof they were not following Section 230 law and refusing to remove it? How were they handling things differently from Twitter (or any social media site for that matter), who also has these problems with their service, and why is Twitter still able to be up? No, I don't mean AWS claims they weren't doing it. I want to know actual evidence. If the post exists, their should be screenshots of them still up now, no?

At this point, cloud services have gotten so large that they probably need to be regulated at this point as a public utility is.

To say AWS is the same as a rental/tenant relationship is laughable. If it was, there would be millions of different cloud services one could go to and this would be a non-issue. But, it clearly isn't close to the same.

Also, if illegal activity is being done (and this stuff was handled like a public utility, as frankly that is the size of these cloud services at this point), then that needs to be handled in a court of law.