Well?

How much did Alex Jones pay twitter for their service?

If conservatives want to talk about making corporations that are far too big or provide some sort of intrinsic public service that actively debilitates you if you are cut from it, let's get that started, but at the moment it isn't a public utility, so the point is a bit moot. Leftists have wanted to make shit like twitter and general internet access a public utility for a while now, and it would indeed alleviate a lot of issues. It always gets stymied by muh free market people though.

This. And I'm not sure if twitter would really want that kind of liability.

that's just wrong, and even if it wasn't, twitter is still allowed to enforce rules

nothing, what is your point

you don't have to like it but that's the law

But I can
No leftists believe it should be a public utility

Bring back the left button and we can talk.

Twitter isn't a public forumn.

bake my cake

faggotry and talmudism should be illegal

it fits every legal definition of such

Just go to a different Baker
Unless there is a baking monopoly I don't see the problem

then your a hypocrite. Laws can't apply in some places and not others, that's retarded.

>Is it okay to cut Alex Jones power or gas because you don’t agree with how he uses his power or gas?
Of couarse you can you fucking idiot if he was just leaking gas into the street then they would cut it

How? All of it's servers are private property. It's IP is private property. It's maintenance is private investment. etc. etc.

>what is your point

That they aren't "denying service" to Alex Jones.
They just decided they didn't want to his content on THEIR site.

Twitter isn't a hosting company, they are a website.

It is not that some retarded cunt judge decided Trump blocking people is against the 1st amendment. Once somebody takes it to court, Twitter, and the rest of the internet that is public, will become a public forum and free speech will reign supreme. This will cause many sites to restrict American users and will eventually cause shitholes like the UK to have to respect free speech or lose out on American business.

are you equating unpopular speech to purposeful dumping of a hazardous chemical with the potential to explode cause mass casualties?
flag checks out

yeah
's analogy was shit. I think a better way to think about it is like guns. You can have them, but if you abuse the power you loose the right to own them.

open to the public=public
don't like it write your congressman

So, how does it fit the definition of a public forum?

I finished reading this shiddy thread at this point.

Attached: adi-approves.jpg (478x700, 118K)

then why is the internet full of 'public forums' that censor people freely without shit being done about it.

W r o n g

I would like a real answer senpai.

They don't pretend to be the most important network or even a breaking news source.

>property that is open to public expression and assembly.

Exactly, and we're on one right now.
The mods can ban anyone they like for whatever reason or even just randomly.
I remember a screenshot of someone getting banned from Jow Forums for liking regular milk over chocolate milk.

checked
because nobody bothers to take it to a high court
did you read the greentext?
the whole town was on private property but the court ruled that the town being open to public use in all other respects makes it public by default

It's not wrong, twitter isn't a public forum. Social media websites should be classified as public forums, as should this site and any site that publishes user content directly from the user as a primary function.

The law is just behind the times, as it usually is when it comes to emerging technology.

>twatter is important

It's just Jow Forums for normies.

>I remember a screenshot of someone getting banned from Jow Forums for liking regular milk over chocolate milk.
lmao

if a rule isnt enforced even remotely how is it relevant to the discussion

False, it is ruled as:
publicly (state) owned property open to the public

The fallacy meme you tried to make makes no sense, get rid of the "wtf is happening to our society" since it has no relevance. Why use twitter as an example because censoring isn't the same thing as denying service. You could have used Apple or Facebook denying him service (by banning him) I know the meme is supposed to be ironic, but at least make it make sense, unless you have 20000iq and purposely made the meme bad to further imitate a lefty meme.

Attached: 1509922323106.jpg (800x807, 340K)

They refused to make them a custom cake. They did not deny them the purchase of any already-made wedding cake they already had.

Attached: 5b52883c125cb.png (1246x1060, 466K)

If you open up your business to the public you open yourself up to Marsh vs Alabama.

The larger and more control of a public area you have the less rights you have to step on US citizens Amendment righs.

For Facebook or Twitter or other such platforms not to fall under that they have to show that they are not major monopolies and that anyone can open up as large of a public network as they currently have.

If they cannot then the rights of the citizen trumps their private rights as to allow private corporations and organizations to trample citizens' rights would threaten the constitution.

The greentext makes a compelling point, yes. I'll agree with you for that. unless the court rules that they do not have a monopoly on the means by which this conversation takes place. So, I guess I'm not sure.

It literally is a service, twitter provides a host for your to share your opinions.

Once the state gets involved, it becomes a public forum. Which they did when they ruled against Trump blocking people. See Title 1 net neutrality as an example.

button 3: gas the kikes
This shit will sort itself out when we get around to doing that.

The court also said their decision was unenforceable. Probably because they knew it was an unlawful decision, so that's basically moot.

censoring someone doesn't fully deny them the service, which is why it doesn't make sense to use that over the Apple and Facebook ban

Publicly traded
PUBLICly traded
PUBLIC

>getting free hosting is a right

Maybe I should call CNN and demand they place an article by me on their website.

That means that trading of ownership can be done by the public on an open stock market. Don't be dense. As a corporation, it privately owns it's property.

>The court also said their decision was unenforceable
So? They can't enforce it because it was a bad decision. The legal ramifications can be pushed further with it and get the FCC involved. Look at how the government is fucking over kikebook now even though they've been doing this shit for years.

>if the baker doesn’t like you find a new baker
>twitter doesn’t like Alex Jones, ditch it and find a new platform if you support him.
....
>be OP
>be faggot
>be too fucking stupid to figure this out

You're probably right, but I was under the impression that because the Open Internet Order was repealed that the FCC didn't really have much power over web service providers.

I am just going to mention that "the Federal Reserve should be closed"
and watch the kike shills run away :)

Run away you demon SCUM

Attached: John-Constantine.jpg (570x708, 45K)

Trumps twitter has already been ruled a public forum
nytimes.com/2018/05/23/business/media/trump-twitter-block.html
it was unenforceable due to separation of powers
>only because he's president

>freespeech is a right
>cake isn't

there you go faggot

The whole point of revoking Title 2 was to give such matters to the FCC again. The internet is a couple of cases away from being ruled as protected free speech for all. I think lawyers are waiting until Trump's judges take over.

You realize you can say both right? I do believe that twitter has the right to deny him a service, but at the same time I believe morally it is wrong to censor him.

Public forums should be considered public property. Private forums can reject whomever they wish.

As far as I'm concerned this case was screwy and still doesn't hold legal weight. However, am pretty much convinced by the Marsh V. Alabama case.

OP has long ran away ....
this works everytime

Until I can hang a sign in my store that says "no niggers, no jews, no dogs" Alex Jones deserves to be on twitter as long as he follows the posted rules.

that's so racist, to dogs :/

I didn't know 7-11 was a forum where people express their ideas.

I bet if you didn't enforce that sign, thereby violating civil rights jewery, you actually might be able to legally get away with displaying it.
Whether you get vandalized by a pack of wild Nigger-Jews is another story.

that's the thing, those big companies WANT to become public utility. This "silencing alex jones" bs is way too obvious.

Is it you again faggit? Just answer me one question: Are you really that miserable to not be bored of shitposting the same fucking question from literally the first hours after Alex Jones ban or are you a payed shill? Thanks.

Attached: 1518604322286.png (452x382, 520K)

Nobody's saying they can't. They're just saying the rules should be consistent and applied consistently.

But twitter isn...oh shit

Who cares? Nationalize Twitter.

There's a difference between "should be able to" do something and "should" do something, and I feel like a lot of people (not necessarily you) intentionally muddy that difference for political points.

For example, even though I find circumcision abominable, I wouldn't want the government to intervene to stop it, because parents should have the right to make medical decisions for their children, not the government. Giving the government the authority to block circumcisions would give it the authority to block other procedures, and though today's government might not abuse that authority, tomorrow's government almost certainly will. The correct approach to end the evil of circumcision without creating a monster of legal precedent is to deal instead with the parents who make the decision, the doctors who perform the procedure, and if you're a crafty bastard, the insurance companies who pay for it. Any one of these routes would stop the needless dick-cutting without handing Uncle Sam a blank check to cut your life support and use your organs to save gangbangers, death row inmates and Mormons.

Get out commie.

Attached: airwolf.gif (2038x1210, 980K)

Cakes aren't speech.

Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Reddit all operate as public forums. I give it 2-6 more years before the courts are forced to rule it as such.

Just like the malls in California during the 90s. If your business operates as an open forum, free for all of the public to use, protected rights apply the same as if it was any other public space.

Attached: 1531883741629.webm (1280x720, 869K)

They sure wouldn't agree with how I use my gas.