They’re a private company. The same statues that give providers the right to refuse spam and block abuse give them the right to fire customers for whatever reason they want.
If their contract with Parler says they can be terminated for violations of TOS / AUP or (more likely) for any reason Amazon decides, then it’s a done deal. ‘Frea Speeks’ as we liked to joking call it when spammers made the claim, is a govt thing. Private businesses aren’t bound by the 1st amendment. Sent from my iPad > On Jan 10, 2021, at 6:44 AM, sro...@ronan-online.com wrote: > > 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. > > When I actively hosted USENET servers, I was repeatedly warned by in-house > and external counsel, not to moderate which groups I hosted based on content, > less I become responsible for moderating all groups, shouldn’t that same > principal apply to platforms like AWS and Twitter? > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Jan 10, 2021, at 3:24 AM, William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote: >> Anybody looking for a new customer opportunity? It seems Parler is in >> search of a new service provider. Vendors need only provide all the >> proprietary AWS APIs that Parler depends upon to function. >> https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/09/amazon-parler-suspension/ >> Regards, >> Bill HErrin
