U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate online speech

Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o... by Karunamon on Saturday September 17, 2022 @11:44PM (#32884222)

It is definitely federally illegal on the grounds of sanctions [1], if not treason, to knowingly provide service to the Islamic State. Twitter's hands are tied.

[1]: https://sanctionssearch.ofac.treas.gov/Details.aspx?id=8759

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o... by cycomanic on Sunday September 18, 2022 @12:30AM (#32884438)

So I guess government restricting free speech is fine?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o... by sfifs on Sunday September 18, 2022 @08:47AM (#32887086)

If you are in a democratic country, your society has explicitly granted your government authority through your voting systems to be the ultimate arbiter and parts of it can and does get revoked as the will of the society changes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o... by indecisive_user on Sunday September 18, 2022 @01:08AM (#32884592)

Whataboutism. Government passing laws on free speech is unrelated to internet platforms enforcing arbitrary rules depending on the outrage mob of the week.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o... by cycomanic on Sunday September 18, 2022 @12:33AM (#32884456)

Also I am not certain that publishing tweets is a violation of sanctions?

[ Parent | on HN ]