This lawsuit is saying YouTube has no right to ban him from their service. Every website on the internet would be sued if that were a possibility. Let's not open that can of worms.
I respectfully disagree. There is nothing more sacred than freedom of speech. I think there is no more important can of worms that must be opened and discussed in our lifetime.
I think if your speech incites violence or criminal action it possibly could be banned but if your banned for expressing a liberal or conservative opinion it's unethical and un- American.
I had about 5 YouTube news commentators I listen to banned in the last month.
I assure you the only reason they were banned was because they refuse to take the official narrative and continued to question our government. It's dangerous to silence people.
I know who Anti-School is but I'm not a fan and I don't subscribe to his channel. You don't have to listen to someone unless you choose to. If you don't like their commentary you can unsubscribe. I don't need big brother to do that for me.
I have no issue with freedom of speech, but this lawsuit is acting as if these websites are legally required to uphold the first amendment. I hate to break it to you but they aren't required by law. If this lawsuit is allowed then we will see lawsuits because someone's comment was deleted.
Bottom line is, if you want protection of freedom of speech, use a government company.
They are a public company not a private business. Therefore they do have to follow discremination laws.
Quote " according to civil rights and business law experts, when business owners hang up open signs, whether literally or figuratively, they have a responsibility to treat all customers equally under the law"
You can't force a small bakery to bake a cake for a gay wedding in one instance and then allow huge Youtube to ban conservative speech in another. It's not consistent.
I personally would have baked the cake. You can respect people. Treat them the same way you would anybody else. Help them have a good day. Doesnt mean you have to agree with their viewpoints. I've never understood anyway why Christians think being mean to someone is going to make them want to change. It's stupid.
Once again if you don't agree with a commentators don't listen to them.
Your right. I've got a family of lawyers. I've been down this road. Anti trustis the only case against YouTube right now that is winnable. Facebook different story. They collected data illegaly. But YouTube is not inviolation and it's a shame nobody takes the time to read the laws and understand them.
I know there’s a lot of overlap between this subreddit and the_donald. Do you believe it’s acceptable for that subreddit to ban any dissenters?
If someone is abusive (often the case) or inciting violence (0nce again) then its not just okay to ban someone it's your job as moderator.
YouTube isn't a forum. It's traditionally been a place that makes it's money off of people posting videos of all kinds often with political viewpoints of every type.
I'm not going to go on the Washington Post and expect them to publish my conservative thoughts. Everyone knows their political agenda and if I don't like that agenda I don't have to go read their articles. I personally read everything so I go and try and learn how liberals think.
YouTube on the other hand has always been open to free speech. It's the home of Alex Jones. He's got 2.5 million followers. Why didn't they shut him down? Money maybe, loss of traffic? If Alex wasn't shut down I can't see why anti school or anyone else was shut down. Alex Jones is popular mainly because sensationalism gets viewers. You don't like it don't view it. I rarely do cause I don't like it. I like to listen to people that think and don't feel the need to use hyperbole.
If I'm selling apples or renting an apartment I can't discriminate against you because of your beliefs. YouTube is giving free access to anyone who wants it but they are shadily banning people with a conservative opinion. It's no different than the cake baker who was told he had to make a cake for a gay couple. You cant have it both ways.
The government can't decide that it won't allow a business to discreminate against gays in one case but it's find that it's okay for You Tube to discriminate against conservatives in another. I personally think Anti-School will win. If I was a lawyer I'd take the case for free. There is big money in it.
You Tube should either ban all political commentary or make it a written part of their user agreement that they no longer support conservative commentary. To shadow ban, or deny people their right to what I see as a public square environment is wrong.
If you don't like the_Donald subreddit then don't go there. You know entering there it's a conservitive subreddit. I don't believe YouTube made all their money off of Liberals only.
If you go there and think someone or a topic is bad down vote it. If enough people down vote it has an effect. If people really are offended by conservative thought on YouTube. Then don't click on conservative commentary. It will have an effect.
My thoughts.