3 ms·
Amazon did not give Parler time to remedy the issue, which was in the contract. And is now trying to blur the line between a suspension and termination. Robert
by dukeofdoom 6y ago
Amazon did not give Parler time to remedy the issue, which was in the contract. And is now trying to blur the line between a suspension and termination.
Robert Barnes, on the Parler lawsuit
https://youtu.be/pAFZw7fGY4A https://youtu.be/pAFZw7fGY4A
Viva Frey, a lawyer did a breakdown on the lawsuit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFp5E7akgy8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFp5E7akgy8
Robert Barnes, On section 230, and the tech lawsuits
https://youtu.be/rD-Zb0nTJw0 https://youtu.be/rD-Zb0nTJw0
Their take on it is that the tech companies have gone too far, and are too arrogant. And now the political climate has shifted. So they will start losing some of these section 230 related cases.
- tptacek 6y agoI'm not going to bother watching Youtube videos on this, because the authority I'm citing here is the judge who wrote the ruling in the TRO, citing the AWS contracts that show Amazon was not under the circumstances required to give Parler notice.
- ben509 6y agoBarnes and Frey didn't read the contract closely. Uncivil Law is a friend of theirs and he goes over the contract here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhWDKx9myI0&t=6187s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhWDKx9myI0&t=6187s He's a conservative lawyer, so he doesn't have a political bias against Parler. They just don't have a case. I think Parler's lawyers misread the contract and thought the 30-day notice applied to termination for cause.
- OniBait 6y agoYeah. Barnes and Frei didn't read the contract at all. They were just going off the court filings. I don't think they were aware of the additional provision about AWS having the right to terminate right after the 30 day suspension notice provision.