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 BlueTemplar on Sunday September 18, 2022 @01:03PM (#32889213)

The stores or more like company towns ?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_v._Alabama

> ruled that a state trespassing statute could not be used to prevent the distribution of religious materials on a town's sidewalk even though the sidewalk was part of a privately-owned company town

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o... by galaxyLogic on Monday September 19, 2022 @01:23AM (#32894567)

The difference is that people giving out the religious materials were doing the giving out. The ruling didn't say they could just send the materials to the owners of the side-walk who would then have to give them out to everybody who walks on their sidewalk.

That would be like expecting Facebook or Twitter to distribute any materials you give them, to everybody who visits FB. That would be totally unfair, companies don't have the obligation to pass on your messages to anybody.

Freedom of Speech means I don't have to repeat and amplify what somebody else says or wants me to say. It is not only the freedom to speak what I want, but also the freedom to NOT speak. And companies have freedom of speech too.

This judicial ruling sounds very suspicious to me.

[ Parent | on HN ]