Violation of the 1st Amendment? There's proof of censorship with political bias. We know it's to influence the election. I don't understand why action hasn't been taken yet. Every time I ask about this no one answers the question. It would be one thing if Reddit's rules explicitly stated that conservative opinions are not allowed. Even in The_Donald we only allow posts that are supportive towards our president. But Reddit actively censors content and bans users for things that get no such actions in other subreddits. Why can't or hasn't there been a court case made of this? Are we waiting for the killing blow, when they delete The_Donald for good? If so, WHY are we waiting?
I know that Trump is aware of our community, and you'd think that there would've been steps taken to protect online conservative communities. But to my knowledge, there's been none. There's so much evidence right now that could be used in a legal case. It's actually surprising that Project Veritas hasn't gone inside Reddit yet. Can you imagine what they might find and if they brought it to light?
Anyways, can we actually do anything? At all?
IMO, yes, it might be possible. However, the very existence of this site is a strong argument that you have freedom of speech still.
Probably not. The First Amendment only prohibits the Congress from infringing speech.
You'd have to sue Reddit on some other grounds. What those might be, I have no idea.
Election interference most likely.
I remember when fark was the hottest thing on the web.
"Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996) is a piece of Internet legislation. It provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an interactive computer service who publish information provided by others"
If this is revoked, as has been mentioned for some companies like Twitter etc, by some such as Barr, they will become liable for what others publish. Like a publisher, aka reality of now.
As long as they are allowed to pose as a public square, while acting as reddit acts towards us, your odds dont seem great. But I'm no lawyer.
No.
You agree to their terms when you create an account.
Additionally, Reddit can do whatever they want with their servers in the same way a Christian baker can refuse to make sodomy cakes.
Reddit's owners have a First Amendment right to be as biased as they like.
Reddit is neither a public forum or a public utility.
Reddit owes you nothing.
But Reddit is a Chinese owned organization. This is foreign influence is it not?
If you don't like Buddhism than don't visit websites about Buddhism.
If you don't like cooking then don't visit Gordon Ramsay's website.
If you don't like Reddit then don't use Reddit.
Problem solved. You are welcome.
No thanks. I will fight back.
Oh really? Then they're a publisher. And they're liable.
They/you can't have it both ways.
Ask yourself this. Can AT&T listen in on your landline phone calls and turn off your service if they don't like what you say? Can they do that?
If not, why not?
How is reddit different?
Once you answer those questions, then explain why reddit is allowed to have freedom from liability just like AT&T.
Personally, I believe Reddit, Facebook, Twitter, etc are publishers but they are currently treated as platforms. Why? I have no fucking idea.
Why is it that Stone can be brought to court, convicted, and sentenced while Barr, Sessions, Durham, et. al struggle to three years just to get a report out? I have no fucking idea.
Why is it that Antifa can mob bystanders and the police do nothing yet VA legislators are working day and night to remove constitutional rights from law abiding citizens? I have no fucking idea.
And the list continues and continues...
Wrong.
They can do whatever they like with their servers because they aren't a public utility and users agree to their terms.
Because the phone network is a public utility and Reddit is not a public utility.
Reddit's CEOs have First Amendment rights to be as biased as they like and they can run their servers how they like too... just like how Christian bakers can refuse to make sodomy cakes.
This is the law, even if it makes you sad.
The CEO has 1st Amendment rights but Reddit does not. The 1A does not specify it. Its property right.
Your claim has no basis in law.
You can't change the law by REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEing.
Reddit has no First Amendment right to be as biased as they like. There's no such right stated in the First Amendment.
They have a property right in controlling the speech on the site that they own.