News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate online speech. Parent comment

Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o... by axpy906 on Saturday September 17, 2022 @05:21PM (#32881697)
Can someone explain to me how corporations are protected by the first in America? I’ve never understood this.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o... by pclmulqdq on Saturday September 17, 2022 @07:47PM (#32882804)
Corporations are entities that exist as contracts between people. The theory is that the speech of a corporation is thus the speech of the people involved in the contract.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o... by LudwigNagasena on Sunday September 18, 2022 @05:08AM (#32885789)
It is a murky argument in the context of limited financial liability and the de facto absence of criminal liability.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o... by 0xBDB on Monday September 19, 2022 @06:37PM (#32905090)
No one is protected by the First Amendment. The government is forbidden to do things. "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of..." several things, including freedom of speech.

The idea that corporations were given First Amendment rights by a recent Supreme Court decision that made them people is very frustrating to me. Corporations were deemed "people" in 1882, in San Mateo County v. Southern Pacific Rail Road, but it doesn't matter even slightly what they are with regards to the First Amendment, which doesn't specify who is speaking. Whether you're a citizen, noncitizen, undocumented immigrant, visitor, or soulless capitalist entity, if you can speak, Congress shall make no law.

[ Parent | on HN ]