User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/14/2021 1:16:54 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Amazon cites tens of thousands of posts and quotes several that are specific incitements of violence with the intent/goal of harming authorities and/or overthrowing the government. Amazon can't be compelled by contract or Constitutional theory to provide services involved in criminal activity. Or stated more briefly, case dismissed. If Parler didn't like this, they shouldn't host such content themselves. How long have you worked at Twitter?  Parler did not create any of those posts. Both AWS & Parler have an agreement for dealing with this, which AWS violated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/14/2021 2:00:39 PM EDT
[#2]
It’s going to be awesome when the govt starts moderating the internet.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/14/2021 4:23:11 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It’s going to be awesome when the govt starts moderating the internet. They already are, now that they are in power. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/14/2021 11:16:56 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I mean.... Do we WANT Parler to win? It might be in our best interest for the future of this country if Parler loses. Just sayin. On the other hand, it would be great if Parler quickly got back online after finding or building an independent hosting service that supports lawful free speech and undermines Amazon's dominant market position. If Parler comes back, and I hope they do, they should also provide more transparency about what content they report to law enforcement. It would also be great if the internet companies were regulated more like the telephone company so that people engaging in controversial but otherwise lawful speech and the platforms that host them can't be so easily censored and silenced on political or partisan grounds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/14/2021 11:22:17 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because Amazon’s retort to the court would sink all their other clients under equal protection. I don’t think Amazon thought it through and is just counting on the usual suspects to carry water for it |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/14/2021 11:23:30 PM EDT
[#6]
Only an illiterate would think that Amazon did not breach its contract with Parler.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/14/2021 11:31:51 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Parler did not create any of those posts. Both AWS & Parler have an agreement for dealing with this, which AWS violated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/14/2021 11:45:41 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Only an illiterate would think that Amazon did not breach its contract with Parler. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 7:05:47 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, Amazon's Acceptable Use Policy, which Parler agreed to abide by, prohibits "Any activities that are illegal, that violate the rights of others, or that may be harmful to others, our operations or reputation ..." (emphasis added). Parler violated the TOS and AUP, not Amazon. 1. They also both have an agreement that Amazon will give Parler notice of any such illegal activities, and that Parler needs to remedy to AWS' satisfaction within 30 days of notice. 2. Again, I believe this only applies to content Parler creates. 3. Parler provided proof in their filing that Twitter has similar, if not identical activity on their platform, and AWS has not taken the same action against them (deplatforming). |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 7:24:23 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because Amazon’s retort to the court would sink all their other clients under equal protection. I don’t think Amazon thought it through and is just counting on the usual suspects to carry water for it https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/A7CDB68B-3E49-4CDD-BB61-1466FD808812_jpe-1778794.JPG  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoT2264gdwcThanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 7:36:42 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 1. They also both have an agreement that Amazon will give Parler notice of any such illegal activities, and that Parler needs to remedy to AWS' satisfaction within 30 days of notice. 2. Again, I believe this only applies to content Parler creates. 3. Parler provided proof in their filing that Twitter has similar, if not identical activity on their platform, and AWS has not taken the same action against them (deplatforming). That would be awesome. “You get a de platform, and you get a de platform..” No more Twitter either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 11:05:34 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That would be awesome. “You get a de platform, and you get a de platform..” No more Twitter either. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 1. They also both have an agreement that Amazon will give Parler notice of any such illegal activities, and that Parler needs to remedy to AWS' satisfaction within 30 days of notice. 2. Again, I believe this only applies to content Parler creates. 3. Parler provided proof in their filing that Twitter has similar, if not identical activity on their platform, and AWS has not taken the same action against them (deplatforming). That would be awesome. “You get a de platform, and you get a de platform..” No more Twitter either. not sure why they brought up Twitter in the filing, AWS doesn't host twitter's feed.. just some back-end dev stuff also, AWS notified Parler starting back in November about issues with posts Parler stated publicly that they wouldn't have a problem switching providers, if necessary, but then later states that getting dropped by AWS sinks them and then sues.. that's a little confusing. and... now it's revealed Parler has been providing information to the FBI on it's users.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 11:09:02 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thanks. Ive been trying to scour for better more authoritative info but it’s been pretty quiet. Honestly I don’t know shit for legal stuff. Maybe NOLO has an insight on this? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 11:12:44 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Only the government is constrained by the equal protection clause, Amazon and Parler are not. Well I guess we’ll know soon enough https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/judge-to-make-decision-soon-regarding-parler-reinstatement-on-amazon-web-services.amp  Attached File Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 11:29:50 AM EDT
[#15]
She's taking her time to rule thinking it will appear as though she's actually applying the rule of law(s) to her decision, but my money is on the situation not changing one fucking iota. This is the new America and we're all fucked, and not Obama 2008 or 2012 fucked, this is a WHOLE NEW fucked to which pretty much all of us have not seen before, at least within our borders.
Given what we're seeing, we're the new domestic terrorists and will be treated as such. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 11:37:46 AM EDT
[#16]
In for the lawsuit resolution in 2034....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 12:02:36 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: not sure why they brought up Twitter in the filing, AWS doesn't host twitter's feed.. just some back-end dev stuff also, AWS notified Parler starting back in November about issues with posts Parler stated publicly that they wouldn't have a problem switching providers, if necessary, but then later states that getting dropped by AWS sinks them and then sues.. that's a little confusing. and... now it's revealed Parler has been providing information to the FBI on it's users.. 1. When you say "back end dev stuff" do you mean...  Attached File2. When you say AWS started notifying Parler in Nov 2020 about miscreant posts, why do you omit the fact that Parler demonstrated proof of removal, and where Parler implemented AWS' AI tech to assist with this, and that AWS advised Parler IN WRITING, that they were satified with Parler's actions? 3. Parler had content that violated their contractusl agreement with AWS, and broke the law. Providing this information to the FBI was 100% correct to do. What exactly is your gripe? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 7:08:33 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 1. When you say "back end dev stuff" do you mean...https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/81660/20210115_110308_jpg-1780134.JPG 2. When you say AWS started notifying Parler in Nov 2020 about miscreant posts, why do you omit the fact that Parler demonstrated proof of removal, and where Parler implemented AWS' AI tech to assist with this, and that AWS advised Parler IN WRITING, that they were satified with Parler's actions? 3. Parler had content that violated their contractusl agreement with AWS, and broke the law. Providing this information to the FBI was 100% correct to do. What exactly is your gripe? looks like the info i had on twitter is outdated, sounds like they have moved over to AWS for more/all stuff now it looks like aws contacted parlor repeatedly and they demonstrated they had problems cleaning up content, telling aws they had something like a 26k post backlog for their volunteer moderators at some point. the aws response to the suite includes fantastic examples and communications regarding community policing, it's pretty clear parlor was in violation of the aws tos. it's really worth the read it appears parler was providing information prior to being shut down by aws... sometimes those felings of 'this seems like a .gov honepot' may be, at least partially, true i still don't get parlor trying to get a tro to get reinstated by aws.. they said they were setup to quickly move to other platforms easily if an issue arose.. an issue arose, so move? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 7:35:20 PM EDT
[#19]
So I checked the docket on the court's website. The hearing on the TRO was held yesterday. This is what the docket says:
01/14/202125 MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Judge Barbara J. Rothstein- Dep Clerk: Grant Cogswell; Pla Counsel: David Groesbeck; Def Counsel: Ambika Doran; CR: Nickie Drury; Time of Hearing: 10:00AM; TRO Hearing via ZoomGov held on 1/14/2021. Court hears argument from counsel and takes matter under advisement. Written order on TRO to follow. Court discusses defense motion to seal documents, plaintiff does not object. Court grants motion to seal, dkt. no. # 15 . Modified on 1/14/2021 (GC). (Entered: 01/14/2021) Amazon filed affidavits from two of their employees who are identified only as Amazon Executive 1 and Amazon Exectuive 2. Apparently they are skeered. Federal judges can take as long as they want to rule, so the fact that she hasn't ruled in 24 hours is a nothing burger. I suspect we will hear from her next week. Senior Judge Barbara J. Rothstein was born in 1939 and was nominated to the bench by Jimmy Carter. And for the all guys commented about the policy implications, this is really a pretty typical commercial litigation case in terms of the claims. This one happens to be high profile, but I handle stuff like this all the time. Breach of contract plus a tortious interference claim. Parler alleges that AWS breached by terminating them without giving 30 days notice. I haven't read the contract, but if what they say about it is right, Parler should win the case. Whether they get a TRO or not is another story, as that is always discretionary. ETA: There is also an antitrust claim, which is baller if they can prove it. Those usually come down to a battle of economists droning on about the relevant market. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 8:23:43 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: looks like the info i had on twitter is outdated, sounds like they have moved over to AWS for more/all stuff now it looks like aws contacted parlor repeatedly and they demonstrated they had problems cleaning up content, telling aws they had something like a 26k post backlog for their volunteer moderators at some point. the aws response to the suite includes fantastic examples and communications regarding community policing, it's pretty clear parlor was in violation of the aws tos. it's really worth the read it appears parler was providing information prior to being shut down by aws... sometimes those felings of 'this seems like a .gov honepot' may be, at least partially, true i still don't get parlor trying to get a tro to get reinstated by aws.. they said they were setup to quickly move to other platforms easily if an issue arose.. an issue arose, so move? I just read the whole thing - thanks for the link. AND THIS IS WHY IS IS ALWAYS IMPORTANT TO HEAR BOTH/ALL SIDES before arriving at conclusions. After reading both filings, I conclude and agree that Amazon will win. And those Parler people are total rookie assclowns if they allowed that nasty shit to stay up on their site, and expected to have any legiti  macy for their platform...buncha fucking clown dumbasses. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 9:38:13 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I just read the whole thing - thanks for the link. AND THIS IS WHY IS IS ALWAYS IMPORTANT TO HEAR BOTH/ALL SIDES before arriving at conclusions. After reading both filings, I conclude and agree that Amazon will win. And those Parler people are total rookie assclowns if they allowed that nasty shit to stay up on their site, and expected to have any legiti macy for their platform...buncha fucking clown dumbasses. the ARS Technica articles on the whole fiasco are a pretty interesting read, they have pdf's of the filings and exhibits to follow along with.. i give them credit for trying, but the technical side of parler seems like it was armature hour, especially with how they handled account lockout verifications and other items |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 9:41:33 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wow, that filing has some details that are new to probably a lot of us. It flatly contradicts the bullshit narrative I've seen that Parler was refusing to do anything to address AWS concerns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 11:16:58 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It flatly contradicts the bullshit narrative I've seen that Parler was refusing to do anything to address AWS concerns. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Wow, that filing has some details that are new to probably a lot of us. It flatly contradicts the bullshit narrative I've seen that Parler was refusing to do anything to address AWS concerns. I had the same exact reaction, until I read Amazon's response. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 11:20:30 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That would be awesome. “You get a de platform, and you get a de platform..” No more Twitter either. Oh, that's not the point. The point was, Twitter does the same thing that you're using as a pre-text to cancel our service. Our service that competes with Twitter. The same Twitter that you just signed a big multi-year contract with. You think maybe Amazon and Twitter might just be colluding to stomp Parler to prevent them from competing with Twitter? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/15/2021 11:29:24 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think that Parler needs to get off Amazon servers immediately. Parler will be better off for the Divorce.  This is the correct thing to do, but there is still a contract for services from AWS. As long as Parler pays AWS and doesn’t do anything illegal like have kiddie porn on the servers then AWS has no right to cancel services without paying Parler. Amazon is going to get bent over big time, with enough money for Parler to own their own servers and small server farm. ARFcom needs to do the same to Godaddy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2021 12:31:19 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 1. They also both have an agreement that Amazon/AWS will give Parler notice of any such illegal activities, and that Parler needs to remedy to AWS' satisfaction within 30 days of notice. Quote HistoryQuoted: 1. They also both have an agreement that Amazon/AWS will give Parler notice of any such illegal activities, and that Parler needs to remedy to AWS' satisfaction within 30 days of notice. 2. Again, I believe this only applies to content Parler creates. 3. Parler provided proof in their filing that Twitter has similar, if not identical activity on their platform, and AWS has not taken the same action against them (deplatforming). I agree this is politically driven censorship by AWS. The problem is that Parler agreed to the AWS terms and left themselves vulnerable by not having a back-up plan. Based on all the pleading I've read, AWS' actions are fully within the contractual rights Parler agreed to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 7:33:57 PM EDT
[#27]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 7:40:51 PM EDT
[#28]
they should have filed it before they were kicked off
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 7:43:34 PM EDT
[#29]
FAWS
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 7:47:08 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is the correct thing to do, but there is still a contract for services from AWS. As long as Parler pays AWS and doesn’t do anything illegal like have kiddie porn on the servers then AWS has no right to cancel services without paying Parler. Amazon is going to get bent over big time, with enough money for Parler to own their own servers and small server farm. ARFcom needs to do the same to Godaddy. This didn't age well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 7:52:30 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Based on all the pleading I've read, AWS' actions are fully within the contractual rights Parler agreed to. Shit. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 7:59:44 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is the judge going to round those people up himself?  Remember when Alito told PA to do certain election shit and they told him to fuck off? Nothing happened. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Judge says to let them back on and Amazon says no thanks. Do we think the FBI or someone else is going to force them or something? Yeah, ignoring a Federal Judge is a REALLY good way to discover that no matter how much money you have, it isn't enough. The Judge could order all of the principals of the company into custody until the order was complied with, and it would stand up, because no other judge would want to set the precedent that THEIR orders could be ignored. Remember when Alito told PA to do certain election shit and they told him to fuck off? Nothing happened. Or lying to a FISA court. Apparently that’s okay to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 8:52:31 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: they should have filed it before they were kicked off Furthermore, Parler failed to adequately prepare for this by 1) Implementing a moderation system that would have satisfied AWS; or, 2) By creating or finding an alternative web services provider committed to supporting lawful free speech. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 8:59:13 PM EDT
[#34]
Here is the conclusion of Judge Barbara Rothstein's order:
ORDER denying Plaintiff's 2 Motion for TRO/Preliminary Injunction. Parler has failed to meet the standard set by Ninth Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court precedent for issuance of a preliminary injunction. To be clear, the Court is not dismissing Parler's substantive underlying claims at this time. Parler has fallen far short, however, of demonstrating, as it must, that it has raised serious questions going to the merits of its claims, or that the balance of hardships tips sharply in its favor. It has also failed to demonstrate that it is likely to prevail on the merits of any of its three claims; that the balance of equities tips in its favor, let alone strongly so; or that the public interests lie in granting the injunction. For these and the remaining reasons articulated in this order, Parler's motion for a preliminary injunction is DENIED. Signed by Judge Barbara J. Rothstein. (PM) (Entered: 01/21/2021) |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 11:41:23 PM EDT
[#35]
So Amazon can remove whoever they want but a bakery has to bake a cake for a gay couple.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 11:56:33 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So Amazon can remove whoever they want but a bakery has to bake a cake for a gay couple. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 12:05:07 AM EDT
[#37]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 1:17:11 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So Amazon can remove whoever they want but a bakery has to bake a cake for a gay couple. The bakery lost their case in the lower court, but ultimately won in the Supreme Court. Nobody has to bake gay cakes if they don't want to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 1:25:11 AM EDT
[#39]
Dan Bongino claims the FBI may be investigating him for role in Parler
 Dan Bongino claims the FBI may be investigating him for role in Parler |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 1:30:58 AM EDT
[#40]
Judge appointed by Jimmy Carter? JFC.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 1:37:49 AM EDT
[#41]
The SCotUS didn't protect the Japanese-Americans in Feb 18, 1942 when it pronounced Franklin Roosevelt's EO 9066 legal that placed them in interment camps.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 1:39:47 AM EDT
[#42]
What I want to know is where are all the folks who are not leftist shit-heads who have the assets to create companies to compete with the Amazons of the world?
Surely there are some out there somewhere? Gain wealth while undermining the leftist agenda.....sounds like a win-win. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 2:15:49 AM EDT
[#43]
An injunction is an extraordinary and unusual remedy in a breach of contract dispute. That is akin to the court stepping into the place of two sophisticated parties and managing their performance of the agreement ( which is extremely rare in contract cases).
The more common remedy for a material breach of this type, if proven by a preponderance of the evidence, is monetary damages. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 3:30:05 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:The bakery lost their case in the lower court, but ultimately won in the Supreme Court. Nobody has to bake gay cakes if they don't want to. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: So Amazon can remove whoever they want but a bakery has to bake a cake for a gay couple. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 3:34:43 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: An injunction is an extraordinary and unusual remedy in a breach of contract dispute. That is akin to the court stepping into the place of two sophisticated parties and managing their performance of the agreement ( which is extremely rare in contract cases). The more common remedy for a material breach of this type, if proven by a preponderance of the evidence, is monetary damages. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 3:48:31 AM EDT
[#46]
Parler should have known to back their shit up being all controversial.
Amazon sucks cock but they can legally end hosting service with whoever they want. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 5:23:56 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So Amazon can remove whoever they want but a bakery has to bake a cake for a gay couple. Quote HistoryQuoted: So Amazon can remove whoever they want but a bakery has to bake a cake for a gay couple. Quoted: Must be the same judges on the election fraud cases. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/753/clipart-hear-no-evil-speak-no-evil-hear--1790926.JPG Quoted: Judge appointed by Jimmy Carter? JFC. If you read filings for Parler only, you would clearly disagree with the judge's ruling. Parler essentially LIED in it's filing for the injunction. This is abundantly clear if you peruse Amazon's own response to their injunction. I would not be surprised is Amazon and or Twitter does not file a libel suit against them. Their cheif executives and chief counsel (Parler) are truly dumber than a small pile of rocks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 5:48:58 AM EDT
[#48]
Nah, still wreaks of a bullshit denial. Parler may be off on the breach of contract claim, but it seems pretty clear to me that AWS did conspire against Parler with other entities, and that the tortious interference did take place.
AWS is essentially claiming that Parler is responsible for everything posted on their platform. AWS wants them to use bots to actively monitor every single byte of data posted to their platform - just like Twitter and Facebook do. That is against Parler's business model and has been since their inception. AWS has known this the whole time. And they just coincidentally decide to enforce it at the exact same time that a social media purge is going on against thousands of conservatives, the President of the United States, and at the same time that both Apple and Google are deplatforming Parler as well? Really? This judge expects us to believe that the timing was purely coincidental? Bullshit. This judge is a fucking Leftist hack, and the ruling is political bullshit. It's obvious which way this judge will rule, so I hope Parler is prepared to appeal. It was always gonna be appealed anyway. I will say that petitioning to have service restored with AWS is pretty dumb, though. Obviously that's not gonna happen, and I don't know why Parler would want to do business with them again anyway after what they did. Sue for money damages and a moral victory and call it a day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 9:05:13 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What I want to know is where are all the folks who are not leftist shit-heads who have the assets to create companies to compete with the Amazons of the world? Surely there are some out there somewhere? Gain wealth while undermining the leftist agenda.....sounds like a win-win. Democrats are the party of the rich these days hence all the mocking of Trump voters incomes, status and lifestyle https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/12/sheldon-adelson-casino-magnate-trump-donor-dies-aged-87 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 9:24:29 AM EDT
[#50]
Good to see all the low post count trolls are still getting paid to spread their bullshit. No rest for the wicked indeed.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File
Attached File