• schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Fortunately in the US I trust that their First Amendment has some teeth. If that were happening in most other countries, I’d be seriously worried that this senator might succeed with his evil plans.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      First amendment is for public spaces, a forum owned by a private company isn’t a public space.

      • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 hours ago

        It’s a public space in Europe for sure. No idea why the US would think openly accessible forums are a private little backroom where rules don’t apply.

        • Blazingtransfem98@discuss.onlineOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Privately owned company.

          Another thing, the first amendment doesn’t protect against violent or criminal speech, like terrorist threats/advocacy, threats towards individuals (bodily harm, sexual assault, murder, etc.) things which there is no shortage of anyway on Steam and they have every right to force the platform to moderate this, on the count of it being against the law.

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 hours ago

          No it’s not a public space.

          Public space would be a place like a national park or the sidewalk. These forums are owned and operated by a private company, they’re private spaces and can be moderated however the company sees fit. Same thing for Twitter or Facebook or Lemmy.

          A senator has the right to tell them that they need to do a better job at moderating their platform if there’s reasons to believe they’re letting people threaten violence or incite criminal activity.

          • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Alright that’s still a weird ruling to someone outside America though because something like a shopping mall or a parking lot are public spaces here too as well as anything that is openly visible on the internet. Which makes a lot of sense.

            • spujb@lemmy.cafe
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 hours ago

              @[email protected] misspeaks when saying “public space”—the term they are thinking of is “public forum.” source

              The rules around what constitutes a true public forum and what the public forum doctrine even means are fuzzy, but in all cases the term refers to a space owned or created by the government.

              Thus, a shopping mall, parking lot, or internet forum, being owned by a private company, is not a public forum and can’t really be defended on the basis of the public forum doctrine.

              Finally, as @[email protected] points out, none of this matters anyway in cases of incitement to imminent lawless action like threats or terrorist speech, which the First Amendment does not protect.

    • spujb@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      on occasion one logs into the internet only to be confronted with the darnedest things said with such confidence