3 ms·
The law forces private property owners to pay taxes they don’t want to. The law forces restaurants to serve “coloreds” even if they don’t want to. Private prope
by ponker 6y ago
The law forces private property owners to pay taxes they don’t want to. The law forces restaurants to serve “coloreds” even if they don’t want to. Private property rights operate within limits circumscribed by the law. And a good law to govern that is the First Amendment. Just extend First Amendment rights to online spaces that are operated by monopolies or near-monopolies.
- xxpor 6y agoGo look at the majority of 1st amendment cases in the courts the past few years. They're mostly corporations arguing against regulations as free speech issues. The jurisprudence, largely from "conservative" judges, is that "speech" is any expression, and it applies to corporations. Ironically, that's what'll make it tough to regulate Facebook/Twitter/etc. They didn't see the 2nd order affects coming.
- prirun 6y agoThe ridiculous part is that a corporation was given "personhood" by the law, with all the rights that people have. A corporation is not a person. Here's the 1st amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." What works for me is to replace the words Congress & government with Facebook, Twitter, or any company with a certain market share. If you want to be a corporation that facilitates communication between thousands of people, you're subject to the rule, ie, you lose some of your private property rights. If you have fewer than say 1000 users, do what you want: only private property rules apply.