Message-ID:

#define SIGILL 6 /* blech */ -- Larry Wall in perl.c from the perl source code

computers / alt.privacy.anon-server / Federal Court rules Big Tech has no 'freewheeling First Amendment right to censor'

Re: Federal Court rules Big Tech has no 'freewheeling First Amendment right to censor'

<NxjZhmfMwuKbPHQGdoQsLuxZNOQjOpgF@news.usenet.farm>

copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=12779&group=alt.privacy.anon-server#12779

copy link Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server

References: <f1812d5e8920bdc1b5d1835a03502a83@dizum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server
Content-Language: en-US
X-Ufhash: Qz5DPyYG1TvKMmmpjAVXwvCEeb%2FWOya%2BatSba9rXLqjLbLSvgU9Rs3m9yd4sgOe0ZT6JRA%2BkB%2B4bZAiyZgimMLmXuXYCLPyhGq1KuON7A4RWYj772X9rh%2F%2FJ6%2FbM638xBNwOQ67niM3YCtbqcLro%2FTIb8tSpNXymEmgEKRIkdSMJ5JiJf6XJmcWUY3pzqpU94oFg9op9%2FTcUKVRaSBH5oX4Cf2PSbQ%3D%3D
Organization: Usenet.Farm
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.11.0
Message-Id: <NxjZhmfMwuKbPHQGdoQsLuxZNOQjOpgF@news.usenet.farm>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 22 13:04:57 UTC
Subject: Re: Federal Court rules Big Tech has no 'freewheeling First Amendment right to censor'
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!news.uzoreto.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr3.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder3.usenet.farm!feeder4.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!news.usenet.farm
From: adm...@sec3.net (SEC3)
In-Reply-To: <f1812d5e8920bdc1b5d1835a03502a83@dizum.com>

by: SEC3 - Fri, 23 Sep 2022 13:04 UTC

On 2022-09-23 08:07, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fed-court-rules-no-freewheeling-
> first-
> amendment-right-to-censor-for-big-tech
>

This 5th Circuit decision conflicts with a May, 2022 opinion by
the 11th Circuit which held that major provisions of a similar
social media law in Florida violate the First Amendment.

https://aboutblaw.com/28K

Judge Kevin Newson, another Trump-appointed judge, wrote:

"Not in their wildest dreams could anyone in the Founding
generation have imagined Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, or Tik-
Tok. But whatever the challenges of applying the Constitution
to ever-advancing technology, the basic principles of freedom
of speech and the press, like the First Amendment’s command, do
not vary when a new and different medium for communication
appears.

One of those 'basic principles' - indeed, the most basic of the
basic — is that [t]he Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment
constrains governmental actors and protects private actors.

Put simply, with minor exceptions, the government can’t tell a
private person or entity what to say or how to say it.

The question at the core of this appeal is whether the Facebooks
and Twitters of the world — indisputably 'private actors' with
First Amendment rights — are engaged in constitutionally protected
expressive activity when they moderate and curate the content
that they disseminate on their platforms.

The State of Florida insists that they aren’t, and it has
enacted a first-of-its-kind law to combat what some of its
proponents perceive to be a concerted effort by “the ‘big tech’
oligarchs in Silicon Valley to 'silence' conservative speech
in favor of a 'radical leftist' agenda.

To that end, the new law would, among other things, prohibit
certain social-media companies from 'deplatforming' political
candidates under any circumstances, prioritizing or deprioritizing
any post or message 'by or about' a candidate, and, more broadly,
removing anything posted by a 'journalistic enterprise' based
on its content.

We hold that it is substantially likely that social-media
companies — even the biggest ones — are 'private actors' whose
rights the First Amendment protects, that their so-called
'content-moderation' decisions constitute protected exercises of
editorial judgment, and that the provisions of the new Florida
law that restrict large platforms’ ability to engage in content
moderation unconstitutionally burden that prerogative. [...]"

--
SEC3

YAMN Tutorials - https://sec3.net/yamnhelp

Federal Court rules Big Tech has no 'freewheeling First Amendment right to censor'

<f1812d5e8920bdc1b5d1835a03502a83@dizum.com>

copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=12980&group=alt.privacy.anon-server#12980

copy link Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server alt.anonymous alt.privacy alt.freespeech alt.discrimination

Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2022 14:07:03 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <f1812d5e8920bdc1b5d1835a03502a83@dizum.com>
Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server,alt.anonymous,alt.privacy,alt.freespeech,alt.discrimination
Injection-Info: neodome.net;
posting-account="mail2news";
key="Xi8lIfBfePOQVHSkhmwnGZN+B++AOCXbdH7PjoTC/1l7n6cKgxzMuznIDFiVVFKP96a/cT
jSBIA96msk8G7FbpMuW6t/wC1IVmy6OrcNleLG2AnpCoGRKTHgX2kSWOQFD6rcKnrSOaUdjdu+F
lxWVEt8tp272cP0polIpIX5ftyJM5kumtkYQQ/16kNLu3LLriZ8/lkQOTuvwntUCVOCbhcfSv2l
JtzpC3yT9O9Ap+rRYJL1utFqVHLGeSEp/sH6hkEtXKWNzUzUP9cR93Z2glwtgXlLzOb7v81q3mO
8bFPrN/vH1zWWcqmtW/tI5U0FQF19T6K9VG6uQ+l/jd/IEA==";
data="U2FsdGVkX19ZJksxU4kp4a35SHxb7xANbcflbvx+6Dg65wOZ1DWPazfHidJ4pZH5El1JZ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=";
mail-complaints-to="abuse@neodome.net"
From: nob...@dizum.com (Nomen Nescio)
Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above.
It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software.
Please report problems or inappropriate use to the
remailer administrator at <abuse@dizum.com>.
Comments: This message was transferred to Usenet via mail2news gateway at
<mail2news@neodome.net>. Please send questions and concerns to
<admin@neodome.net>. Report inappropriate use to <abuse@neodome.net>.
Subject: Federal Court rules Big Tech has no 'freewheeling First Amendment right to censor'
Injection-Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2022 12:10:01 +0000 (UTC)
Path: i2pn2.org!rocksolid2!news.neodome.net!mail2news

by: Nomen Nescio - Fri, 23 Sep 2022 12:07 UTC

Subject	Author
Federal Court rules Big Tech has no 'freewheeling First Amendment right to censo	Nomen Nescio
Re: Federal Court rules Big Tech has no 'freewheeling First Amendment right to c	SEC3