Article 230 is unconstitutional According to the Scotus

We have a right as Americans to say what ever we want on social media, this is all I was getting at earlier.
So either we as humans learn to accept what our words really are or be prepared to be butt hurt a whole lot more!!
The banning of someone is speaking their oppinions is NOW OFFICIALLY unconstitutional!

I’m sorry dick…I’m going to have to claim ignorance here…what exactly are you trying to say?are you just bitching,or are you just doing F.Y.I

Keyword: Large tech platforms with substantial market power. As I told you in the other thread, does in no way apply to our private property here at DTV.

Secondly, DTV is operated under GERMAN law. Nor the US constitution or any US agency has jurisdiction over this website at all.

The “virtual property right” generally permits - irrespective of the basis on which it is exercised - the deletion of posts (cf. e.g. LG München Germany, judgement file no. 30 O 11973/05).

1 Like

Again, these will be classified as utility and in order to act in this country this plat form will have to act as fit or are you so retarded you cannot comprehend the court document I sampled for you to look up?
Again, given a place to look but to retarded to read the facts.

Facebook, Twitter maybe. DTV once we have a billion international users. Hahahhaa. So some time around the year 2510.

Austin Powers Doctor Evil GIF

1 Like

Lukas, thank you

“The First Amendment protects individuals from government censorship. Social media platforms are private companies, and can censor what people post on their websites as they see fit.”

1 Like

I’ll still be here…

2 Likes

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.