15 ms·

Indeed, no business wants to carry unnecessary liability. Funny, Didn't see all this crying about censorship when MC & Visa cut off pornhub... edit: just to b

Indeed, no business wants to carry unnecessary liability. Funny, Didn't see all this crying about censorship when MC & Visa cut off pornhub... edit: just to be clear, I mean when MC & Visa decided pornhub was a potential liability, they cut them off. When companies decide Trump or Parler are a liability - they do the same - they cut them off. Thats just capitalism.

throwaway3699 6y ago
I don't agree that it's 'just capitalism'. Just because I acquire a piece of private property does not necessarily give me the right to do anything I want with it. I can't clobber you over the head with a product I bought just like how many countries have laws to say I can't kick you out of private property that's also a public square.
- mech422 6y ago
  >>I don't agree that it's 'just capitalism'. Just because I acquire a piece of private property does not necessarily give me the right to do anything I want with it. However, you can evict me from the property and charge me with trespassing, which is closer to whats happening here.. edit: Hell, you can even infringe my 2nd amendment rights and ban me from having a gun on your property! Also, I'm not sure 'private' property can be a 'public' square. At least in New England, the town commons was public land ?
  - afuchs 6y ago
    There are instances where such freedoms are granted to individuals while on private property. However, it is limited to specific circumstances and only when a specific jurisdiction's laws require it. Quickly looking this up brings me to the supreme court ruling, Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins [1], which involved laws that were specific to the state of California. Notably, the applicability of this ruling was narrowed over time. Despite this, it has been brought up as an argument in situations with circumstances that differed from those of the original ruling, where questions of its applicability can be easily raised. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._Robins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._R...
    - mech422 6y ago
      Hmm - must have been pretty hard to narrow, since its seems to specifically target shopping centers ? edit: I seem to remember my son's class not being able to petition in front of a grocery store in California like 20 years ago...Wonder if it had been narrowed by then?
  - MrMan 6y ago
    In New England they also practiced banishment and put people in stocks for moral infractions.
    - corin_ 6y ago
      Most of the world including New England still locks people up for moral infractions, even if no longer using stocks.
55555 6y ago
In my circles, there was huge backlash against the Pornhub decision by Visa and MC. It was a terrible action.
- mech422 6y ago
  I don't recall seeing much about it? Though, I have to admit I don't do social media much.
  - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
    Certain topics are stigmatized for various reasons so lots of people don't want to be seen to complain about things because they would then be associated with the topic and get the stigma too.

throwaway3699 6y ago

I don't agree that it's 'just capitalism'. Just because I acquire a piece of private property does not necessarily give me the right to do anything I want with it. I can't clobber you over the head with a product I bought just like how many countries have laws to say I can't kick you out of private property that's also a public square.

mech422 6y ago
>>I don't agree that it's 'just capitalism'. Just because I acquire a piece of private property does not necessarily give me the right to do anything I want with it. However, you can evict me from the property and charge me with trespassing, which is closer to whats happening here.. edit: Hell, you can even infringe my 2nd amendment rights and ban me from having a gun on your property! Also, I'm not sure 'private' property can be a 'public' square. At least in New England, the town commons was public land ?
- afuchs 6y ago
  There are instances where such freedoms are granted to individuals while on private property. However, it is limited to specific circumstances and only when a specific jurisdiction's laws require it. Quickly looking this up brings me to the supreme court ruling, Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins [1], which involved laws that were specific to the state of California. Notably, the applicability of this ruling was narrowed over time. Despite this, it has been brought up as an argument in situations with circumstances that differed from those of the original ruling, where questions of its applicability can be easily raised. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._Robins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._R...
  - mech422 6y ago
    Hmm - must have been pretty hard to narrow, since its seems to specifically target shopping centers ? edit: I seem to remember my son's class not being able to petition in front of a grocery store in California like 20 years ago...Wonder if it had been narrowed by then?
- MrMan 6y ago
  In New England they also practiced banishment and put people in stocks for moral infractions.
  - corin_ 6y ago
    Most of the world including New England still locks people up for moral infractions, even if no longer using stocks.

55555 6y ago

In my circles, there was huge backlash against the Pornhub decision by Visa and MC. It was a terrible action.

mech422 6y ago
I don't recall seeing much about it? Though, I have to admit I don't do social media much.
- chordalkeyboard 6y ago
  Certain topics are stigmatized for various reasons so lots of people don't want to be seen to complain about things because they would then be associated with the topic and get the stigma too.