6 ms·

Quite the opposite. Everything Amazon did was within the terms of their contract. Amazon could have terminated the agreement sooner. Since Amazon waited until a

Quite the opposite. Everything Amazon did was within the terms of their contract. Amazon could have terminated the agreement sooner. Since Amazon waited until after it was abundantly clear that harmful content was being posted on Parler, its going to be quite difficult for Parler to find much sympathy in any court.

erichocean 6y ago
> Everything Amazon did was within the terms of their contract. Everything except for 30 days notice. Oops.
- lliamander 6y ago
  And opportunity to cure.
  - ogre_codes 6y ago
    Parler was in breech. They were notified and given nearly 2 months to remedy.
  - pixl97 6y ago
    >Amazon started investigating violent threats on Parler in November and reported more than 100 pieces of content over the next seven weeks, but the site never took action, according to one executive.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  Amazon gave them 7 weeks notice that they were violating the contract. Once Parler breeched the contract, Amazon no longer had an obligation to them. The fact that they continued operating without making significant efforts to get into compliance makes it pretty unlikely the court will be sympathetic.
foolinaround 6y ago
Just to play the Devil's advocate here: Now, Amazon had given notice to Parler that they want some moderation that is automated... What are the specs for that? What would satisfy Amazon? Can it be delivered within that timeframe setting aside whatever else is going on? These are real concerns for a company going forward. I guess many do not state because of the political ramifications of this particular case, but it will be discussed in board rooms. as an example, i had a bad experience once with a HOA while living in my own home; the next home i bought, i ensured that i did not have to deal with the HOA.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  > Now, Amazon had given notice to Parler that they want some moderation that is automated... What are the specs for that? What would satisfy Amazon? Can it be delivered within that timeframe setting aside whatever else is going on? What makes you think Parler is interested in complying with the terms of the contract at all? The only benefit of Parler over Twitter or Facebook is the fact that you can say things which will get you banned on the bigger platforms. If Parler implements moderation which will comply with Amazon's terms of service, why would anyone use Parler at all? > These are real concerns for a company going forward. I guess many do not state because of the political ramifications of this particular case, but it will be discussed in board rooms. Why? If you are a startup for a recipe making app, are you going to be worried about a company who got booted from a service for allowing users to discuss kidnapping, rape, and murder openly? If I'm a business, it's a simple question. Can we operate on AWS/ Azure/ Apple's App Store/ etc and meet their terms of service. There is a huge world of business ideas that don't need to violate the fairly broad terms in Amazon's TOS.
  - foolinaround 6y ago
    I am trying to steer our discussion past the politics of this. It is clear that there exists today violent content on both twitter and FB as well, but that is beside the point. > If Parler implements moderation which will comply with Amazon's terms of service Can you point to where in AWS TOS this is defined? We need to agree first that this is a subjective decision on AWS part, regardless of which side of the aisle we fall on. If we are able to agree on it, it goes back to my original point of the risk. If you insist that it is objective, then should'nt there be an ombudsman for AWS to ensure that they are now in compliance to it? For something to be objective, there are clear rules that need to be kept on both sides. > a service for allowing users to discuss kidnapping, rape, and murder openly? I implore you to step out of the political lens for this argument. You don't have to search too hard to find such content on twitter and FB as well. The reason they can get away is I guess they can afford to have their own servers. This kind of environment stifles the new entrants and cannot be good. > Can we operate on AWS/ Azure/ Apple's App Store/ etc and meet their terms of service Honestly, I feel that the ground is not stable with these TOS and their changes, and their arbitrary interpretations. -- You brought up Apple... so lets look at how it took the app off its store because Parler promoted violent content; it is an admission that it is watching against it. So, tomorrow, if two guys use its own messaging apps to commit a terrorist attack, should'nt Apple be liable for it? -- Let me ask you for a minute to pretend you are right wing, and you start that recipe making app -- you will not be at peace even though current app is just fine. This unease is what is not good for business confidence.

erichocean 6y ago

> Everything Amazon did was within the terms of their contract. Everything except for 30 days notice. Oops.

lliamander 6y ago
And opportunity to cure.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  Parler was in breech. They were notified and given nearly 2 months to remedy.
- pixl97 6y ago
  >Amazon started investigating violent threats on Parler in November and reported more than 100 pieces of content over the next seven weeks, but the site never took action, according to one executive.
ogre_codes 6y ago
Amazon gave them 7 weeks notice that they were violating the contract. Once Parler breeched the contract, Amazon no longer had an obligation to them. The fact that they continued operating without making significant efforts to get into compliance makes it pretty unlikely the court will be sympathetic.

foolinaround 6y ago

Just to play the Devil's advocate here: Now, Amazon had given notice to Parler that they want some moderation that is automated... What are the specs for that? What would satisfy Amazon? Can it be delivered within that timeframe setting aside whatever else is going on? These are real concerns for a company going forward. I guess many do not state because of the political ramifications of this particular case, but it will be discussed in board rooms. as an example, i had a bad experience once with a HOA while living in my own home; the next home i bought, i ensured that i did not have to deal with the HOA.

ogre_codes 6y ago
> Now, Amazon had given notice to Parler that they want some moderation that is automated... What are the specs for that? What would satisfy Amazon? Can it be delivered within that timeframe setting aside whatever else is going on? What makes you think Parler is interested in complying with the terms of the contract at all? The only benefit of Parler over Twitter or Facebook is the fact that you can say things which will get you banned on the bigger platforms. If Parler implements moderation which will comply with Amazon's terms of service, why would anyone use Parler at all? > These are real concerns for a company going forward. I guess many do not state because of the political ramifications of this particular case, but it will be discussed in board rooms. Why? If you are a startup for a recipe making app, are you going to be worried about a company who got booted from a service for allowing users to discuss kidnapping, rape, and murder openly? If I'm a business, it's a simple question. Can we operate on AWS/ Azure/ Apple's App Store/ etc and meet their terms of service. There is a huge world of business ideas that don't need to violate the fairly broad terms in Amazon's TOS.
- foolinaround 6y ago
  I am trying to steer our discussion past the politics of this. It is clear that there exists today violent content on both twitter and FB as well, but that is beside the point. > If Parler implements moderation which will comply with Amazon's terms of service Can you point to where in AWS TOS this is defined? We need to agree first that this is a subjective decision on AWS part, regardless of which side of the aisle we fall on. If we are able to agree on it, it goes back to my original point of the risk. If you insist that it is objective, then should'nt there be an ombudsman for AWS to ensure that they are now in compliance to it? For something to be objective, there are clear rules that need to be kept on both sides. > a service for allowing users to discuss kidnapping, rape, and murder openly? I implore you to step out of the political lens for this argument. You don't have to search too hard to find such content on twitter and FB as well. The reason they can get away is I guess they can afford to have their own servers. This kind of environment stifles the new entrants and cannot be good. > Can we operate on AWS/ Azure/ Apple's App Store/ etc and meet their terms of service Honestly, I feel that the ground is not stable with these TOS and their changes, and their arbitrary interpretations. -- You brought up Apple... so lets look at how it took the app off its store because Parler promoted violent content; it is an admission that it is watching against it. So, tomorrow, if two guys use its own messaging apps to commit a terrorist attack, should'nt Apple be liable for it? -- Let me ask you for a minute to pretend you are right wing, and you start that recipe making app -- you will not be at peace even though current app is just fine. This unease is what is not good for business confidence.