Min menu

Pages

"X" Platform Sues California Over Content Supervision Rules

 


"X" Platform

Sues California Over Content Supervision Rules

The lawsuit in the Sacramento Federal Court deals with the ABB 587 Act

which came into force a year ago


and mandates social media networks to

publish their rules on misinformation, harassment, hate speech

or extremism

and California Governor Gavin Newsom said when signing the law that

the people of California deserve to know

how these platforms affect our public discourse.


However

according to the former Twitter platform X :

the "true intention" of the text is to "press the platforms to remove some of

the contents guaranteed by the Constitution, which the mandate sees as a problem".


Lawyers for

the San Francisco-based platform contend that

the law "A587 violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution"

which guarantees freedom of expression, and the California Constitution.


After Elon Musk :

acquired Twitter in October 2022

he quickly changed its modus operandi, starting with content stewardship

and the American billionaire adopts a radical vision of free speech.


With ABB 587 :

the state is forcing social media networks to

take a general position on controversial issues or political issues," X wrote.


Because X must take :

a position on these matters as defined by the mandate

  • it (X) is forced to adopt the politically charged terminology of the mandate
  • which constitutes a form of speech imposed per se"
  • according to the counsel for the podium.


Elon Musk recently

threatened to sue the Anti-Defamation League

("ADL", which combats anti-Semitism and racism)

accusing it of defamation, holding it responsible for the company's lost revenue.


US billionaire Elon Musk and his "X" platform face

more than 2,200 arbitration cases linked to

the sweeping changes that

followed his acquisition last year on Twitter according to the court filing.


Former Twitter employees accuse Musk of :

denying them the promised end-of-service bonus after significant

job cuts and delaying their arbitration cases by not paying

the corresponding registration fee, according to CNBC, which first aired the news.





Comments