The Gulf Time Newspaper One of the finest business newspapers in the UAE brought to you by our professional writers and editors.
A federal district court has refused to order Amazon Web Services (AWS) to restore service to Parler, the right-wing Twitter alternative that the web hosting service took down on January 10, in the aftermath of the storming of the US Capitol. The decision highlights the very limited legal options available to social media platforms if the major web hosting services refuse to carry them. And it stands as a reminder that the regulation of content on social media is now inevitably a challenge not only for the platforms, but for providers of essential services like Amazon and Apple.
The case arose at what might have been a moment of triumph for Parler. The platform, which launched in 2018 with backing from important conservative figures like Rebekah Mercer, emphasizes free speech. Consequently, its terms of service for users that more permissive than Twitter’s.
As of December 2020, Parler had about 2.3 million users. When, on January 8, Twitter “permanently suspended†then-President Donald Trump from its service, users flocked to Parler in anticipation that Trump would start using it. According to the company, it saw a 355% spike in installations over just a few days.
Instead of being able to capitalise on that sudden growth, Parler found itself in the position of having the plug pulled on its ability to function. In taking down the platform, AWS asserted that Parler had violated their terms of service. Those terms prohibit content that “illegal, harmful, or offensive.†The contract between AWS and Parler also required the app to have a content moderation system in place to address violations. The same contract authorised AWS to suspend service immediately if Parler breached its contractual obligations. Parler, unable thus far to find an alternative web hosting service, has been dark ever since. It sued AWS on three grounds.
The first alleged that AWS was engaged in anticompetitive behaviour by allowing Twitter to remain in place while taking down Parler. The court made short work of this allegation: Parler had no evidence that there was any illicit agreement or
coordination between AWS and Twitter. Parler’s lawyers probably raised the charge in the first place just to get the word “antitrust†into a story about Amazon. To be sure, the fact that Parler can’t get hosted anywhere carries a whiff of monopoly.
—Bloomberg