3 ms·
> I don't understand how any CEO of any large company would be comfortable with the risk of getting the rug pulled underneath all of its critical systems given
by ogre_codes 6y ago
> I don't understand how any CEO of any large company would be comfortable with the risk of getting the rug pulled underneath all of its critical systems given that this is just what happened.
If you are trying to make a case that Amazon arbitrarily pulls the plug on customers, Parler should not be your poster child. Amazon gave them 7 weeks of advance notice that their content was in violation of their agreement. Then they only severed the agreement once criminal activities were tied to the platforms content.
CEO's aren't going to bat an eye at this any more than they are concerned that YouTube removed copyrighted content.
- lliamander 6y ago> Amazon gave them 7 weeks of advance notice that their content was in violation of their agreement. Not the same thing as giving them notice of intent to terminate the contract. If Amazon said "some of your content is in violation, but let's work together to improve your moderation, you have nothing to worry about" that does not give Amazon the right to turn around and terminate them after only 24 hours notice.
- ogre_codes 6y agoParler was in breech. Amazon could have stopped providing service at any point where Parler was knowingly hosting content that violated their contract. The fact that they continued providing service was a curtesy, not an obligation. For most smaller/ non connected entities they'd have been dropped much much sooner, and likely without notice.
- lliamander 6y agoI believe these assertions are contested by Parler. It will be very interesting to see how the case goes.