Spectrum - Roku dispute (9 Viewers)

Juan

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 14, 2003
26,235
5,733
Moscow Russia
It does seem that all sides think section 230 needs to be revisited at a minimum. Revoking it makes YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, SatelliteGuys, etc. into publishers though, which will result in very heavy-handed moderation (or censorship as some would say), so probably not what anyone actually wants.
Another great post...but when you throw monopoly in the big tech mix it really screams review
 

ncted

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 4, 2004
5,096
3,422
Durham, NC
The app is supposed to be coming to the new Chromecast with Google TV in "early 2021". Once it does, I plan to finally try out Apple TV+. Hopefully the app will be in the Play Store for any Android TV device that meets minimum specs to download and install. We'll see..
Yep. Can't come too soon.
 

NYDutch

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Dec 28, 2013
3,257
4,454
Where our wheels go
I know what it does to companies that are basically monopolies...and thats the real issue..competion being squashed
Gee, Parler didn't have much trouble finding a new home when Amazon kicked them out. Remind which social media company has no competition? There's no question the big guys were/are much better at marketing themselves than some others though...
 

Juan

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 14, 2003
26,235
5,733
Moscow Russia
Gee, Parler didn't have much trouble finding a new home when Amazon kicked them out. Remind which social media company has no competition? There's no question the big guys were/are much better at marketing themselves than some others though...
I would appreciate if you would leave politics out of this so we can continue thus duscussion but anytime the majority silence a minority competitor its usually a antitrust violation..several examples would be att,exxon and even a&p super markets amongst others
 
  • Like
Reactions: solarvic

NYDutch

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Dec 28, 2013
3,257
4,454
Where our wheels go
I would appreciate if you would leave politics out of this so we can continue thus duscussion but anytime the majority silence a minority competitor its usually a antitrust violation..several examples would be att,exxon and even a&p super markets amongst others
Politics??? Amazon kicked out Parler for contract/TOS violations as they were legally entitled to do.
 

ncted

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 4, 2004
5,096
3,422
Durham, NC
Parler didn't have much trouble finding a new home when Amazon kicked them out
Just being pedantic here and not applying any judgement to Amazon's decision to de-platorm Parler.

They were able to get a website up on another platform. The actual application will likely take months to get up and running on a new cloud because it was built in a cloud-native way that takes advantage of AWS proprietary technologies, which is its own lesson for everyone: you may one day have to migrate to a new cloud provider, so develop. your software with that in mind.
 

edisonprime

SatelliteGuys Pro
Dec 12, 2012
2,505
800
55901
Section 230 is about removing liability for publishing 3rd party discussions. It has nothing to do with freedom of speech. Are newspapers required to print every letter to the editor they receive? Of course not. Is Twitter, Facebook, et al, that much different? As private businesses, shouldn't they have the right to decide what they publish as well?
They are PUBLIC FORUMS; therefore supposed to be bound by the first amendment.
 

ncted

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 4, 2004
5,096
3,422
Durham, NC
Yeah, but streaming devices (as well as social media) are PUBLIC FORUMS, and therefore are supposed to follow the first amendment.
Streaming devices and services are not PUBLIC FORUMS. Social Media is very a very different thing since they are mostly free for anyone to use, but still have terms of service. Given than the users are the product and not the customer clouds things. I am not arguing what should or shouldn't be allowed on them -- just commenting on the legal status you are asserting.
They are PUBLIC FORUMS; therefore supposed to be bound by the first amendment.
Not necessarily. Terms and conditions...product vs. customer.
Again, a PUBLIC FORUM.
AWS is absolutely not a PUBLIC FORUM. It is a paid service with terms and conditions. Again, not commenting on whether Parler should have been booted. Just commenting on legal status.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top