Runningbear--please allow the OP to speak for himself and speak of his intent here. We cannot speak about what the intent is unless he posts back.
Thank you!
Is threatening to get sued over posting a link a violation of free speech?
- Thread starter alucard9114
- Start date
- Status
Runningbear--please allow the OP to speak for himself and speak of his intent here. We cannot speak about what the intent is unless he posts back.
Thank you!
alucard9114
iPF Noob
Post was not meant to be an attack on this forum or any other forum. I was just wanting to know if anyone on here is noticing a bit bigger pinch all over the web?? In general.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
The Web covers the world, so I'd say yes given restrictions in content by governments in various countries. I won't go into specifics because politics aren't allowed on this forum. Tech advances have made it easier both to block and get around things, though.
If you mean are certain forums enforcing rules more strictly, I'd also say yes, partly because there's more enforcement of copyrights and intellectual property rights.
But the gripe about not linking to verboten vendors on a certain forum sounds arbitrary. Maybe the site is getting money for referrals, which is perfectly legal.
Right now, YouTube is banned in a certain country. I am not allowed to state here what I think of that because it's political, and our rules forbid it. I accept that. We have freedom of speech within the rules, and that's good enough for me. If the rules change and I find I cannot follow them or enforce them, I leave the forum and its as simple as that.
Yes, agree with you. It makes it hard to discuss tech business, because so much of it can be political, but I get why this forum and others have such rules. Oftentimes on forums, discussion degenerates quickly without such rules.
alucard9114
iPF Noob
Banging answer thanks for the input!
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
runningbear29
iPF Noob
La Germania E Verament E Vostra Amica.
Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted. -- Groucho Marx
Better to ask questions than jump to conclusions. -- Kay
runningbear29
iPF Noob
La Germania E Verament E Vostra Amica. "Germany is truly your friend"
Yes, I know what that meant.
Corporations are free to allow or not allow anything they want to allow or not allow. It is not a freedom of speech issue like me thinks you are thinning. Not sure what your question is, so forgive me if I misunderstood something.
When we talk about the freedom of speech guaranteed us by the Constitution, we are not talking about private concerns because the guarantees guaranteed us do not apply. Only the government can suppress freedom of speech yet a company like FaceBook or Google can limit what we say on their properties if they choose to do so. And they will tread very lightly because I think they do not care about fools like me and they do not want to be accused of suppressing my right to be an arse.
The government cannot tell Google to shut that Bob Maxey fella up. That would be a constitutional violation. Google can, however, do whatever they want to do because freedom of speech does not apply.
I hear people talk of how this company is their violating freedom of speech. Not at all true. They have the right to allow or not allow just about anything.
When we talk about the freedom of speech guaranteed us by the Constitution, we are not talking about private concerns because the guarantees guaranteed us do not apply. Only the government can suppress freedom of speech yet a company like FaceBook or Google can limit what we say on their properties if they choose to do so. And they will tread very lightly because I think they do not care about fools like me and they do not want to be accused of suppressing my right to be an arse.
The government cannot tell Google to shut that Bob Maxey fella up. That would be a constitutional violation. Google can, however, do whatever they want to do because freedom of speech does not apply.
I hear people talk of how this company is their violating freedom of speech. Not at all true. They have the right to allow or not allow just about anything.
LOL . . . spend a week with me as we delve into the hidden web/dark web for a research project. Freedom of speech is alive and well. Dangerously so, actually. Google does not index the vast majority of the available web. Did you all know that? The DW is said to be many times larger than what you will find indexed by Google and Bing. You will find ads for LSD, hit men, people who will custom steal products for you to order, stolen property, stolen CC and PayPal accounts and you can purchase in bulk using BitCoin.
Visit the DW and learn why some freedoms should be suppressed.
A few points:
Someone owns this forum and he or she can say no Obama talk, no discussing food containing MSG and absolutely no talk of Android. This is not suppression, it is a right they enjoy as owner(s) of the IPF. Everyone is out for the last few remaining dollars. Google gave us Android for free, but their motives were financial. So they will make rules that they believe will help further their bottom line. I do not see the big changes the OP sees.
I do see a push to monetize and the big players jockeying for position. they all want to be King and they will do whatever they need to do to monetize the web.
Only the United states Government can suppress freedom of speech. At least in the way those that scream about their fictitious freedom of speech "rights" are concerned. Non-government entities can do whatever they want to do and it is not a freedom of speech issue in the constitutional vein.
Visit the DW and learn why some freedoms should be suppressed.
A few points:
Someone owns this forum and he or she can say no Obama talk, no discussing food containing MSG and absolutely no talk of Android. This is not suppression, it is a right they enjoy as owner(s) of the IPF. Everyone is out for the last few remaining dollars. Google gave us Android for free, but their motives were financial. So they will make rules that they believe will help further their bottom line. I do not see the big changes the OP sees.
I do see a push to monetize and the big players jockeying for position. they all want to be King and they will do whatever they need to do to monetize the web.
Only the United states Government can suppress freedom of speech. At least in the way those that scream about their fictitious freedom of speech "rights" are concerned. Non-government entities can do whatever they want to do and it is not a freedom of speech issue in the constitutional vein.
I have been on many forums and I have never been forced to shop or told where to shop. This forum has paid ads and as soon as you mention Kittens or Kosher food, you will see ads for kitten pajamas and Kosher Vodka pop up. Is this what you mean? Not sure it is a matter of a forum owner trying to control; just trying to make a few dollars, I suspect. Forums are expensive to operate.
Care to clarify?
Bad people, mean people and naughty words; not the harmless ones, but the 24.00 naughty words I could teach you are examples of things not allowed here. Other things not allowed are mentioned in the rules. Some people do not read the rules and they get mad when their "freedom of speech" is trampled to death.
The IPF does not allow talk of Warze, stolen IP, a certain iOS application that dares not speak its name; game ROMS and such are not allowed, either.
So I disagree. If anything the web is far too lenient, and it must be stopped, I tell you what.
alucard9114
iPF Noob
In forum infancy you could not find a forum with rules of any kind now most forums have strict guide lines on how to behave or what to even talk about. In some cases such as iPad forums that's a good thing so that the forum stays on track but in my opinion I think the line is starting to get crossed. Almost every forum has really strick rules on links, topics, and language.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
- Status
