It seems Paller’s Antitrust litigation Opposing Amazon’s suspension of its AWS account is not a good start. In an emergency hearing on Thursday, will the judge order Amazon to reopen AWS for Parler? Refuse to do so:
US District Court Judge Barbara Rothstein (Barbara J. Rothstein) said at a hearing on Thursday that she does not intend to order Amazon to immediately bring Parler back online. Instead, she expressed interest in adopting a more cautious approach to determine whether a permanent ban should be issued to restore network services to Parler.
After talking with the two people after the hearing, it sounds like the judge has not yet made a formal ruling, but she said that a ruling will be made soon. Another comment I heard from the people in the hearing was that Paller’s lawyer did not seem to understand some fairly basic concepts about all these working principles, which did not bode well for his client. In addition, Amazon’s lawyers have stated that they told Parler that if the site implements a real content review strategy, they will allow the site to return to AWS, which once again proves the fact that they suspended rather than terminated Parler’s account (which became the focus of the lawsuit. Because Parler believed that terminating the contract violated their contract, and Amazon said that the account was only suspended, which is different from terminating the contract.
One more thing: Paller’s lawyer apparently told the judge Paller could Do not The judgment can be made through litigation all the way (in an argument, if you are asked why any damage cannot be resolved through damages in the future, then the site will not be restarted immediately will cause irreparable damage).I think it’s interesting because just last week (of course it feels like a century ago) Paller insisted It doesn’t need section 230 CEO John Matze has never said that Parler is big enough to resolve any lawsuits without 230. At the time, I pointed out to him that although his supporters, the Mercer family, are rich, they are not. that rich.
However, the change from “Well, if we take responsibility for the user’s posts, we can handle such lawsuits” to “Uh, we can’t afford the lawsuits filed to keep the site alive”, which is really amazing.
More legal-related stories from Techdirt:
Sheryl Sandberg rashly argued that only Facebook can stop bad guys online
Jack Dorsey explained the difficult decision to ban Donald Trump; reiterated support for turning Twitter into a decentralized agreement
House of Representatives questioned the telecommunications giant’s investigation of broadband prices during the pandemic