* w...@typo.org (Wayne Bouchard) [Sun 10 Jan 2021, 16:40 CET]:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 04:32:29PM +0100, niels=na...@bakker.net wrote:
* sro...@ronan-online.com (sro...@ronan-online.com) [Sun 10 Jan 2021, 14:46
CET]:
While Amazon is absolutely within their rights to suspend anyone
they want for violation of their TOS, it does create an
interesting problem. Amazon is now in the content moderation
business, which could potentially open them up to liability if
they fail to suspend any other customer who hosts objectionable
content.
Didn't that ship sail when they booted WikiLeaks off their
platform?
Yeah, pretty much.
See, the real issue here is AUPs which initially were used to make
sure users knew that their services could not be used to facilitate
illegal things and then used to keep order on the platforms by
restricting abusive behavior. However the definition of "abusive"
has now been extended so greatly and with constantly changing rules
that it's making the statement, effectively, "if we don't like what
you say, or if we don't like you or your business, sucks to be you."
It's amazing how far the world has stumbled that "fomenting violent
insurrection and calling for the murder of elected officials" now
falls under standard T&Cs against abusive behaviour where this used
to be perfectly fine a year ago.
(That was sarcasm.)
-- Niels.
