Legal firm had said Real World Portal encouraged misogyny and there was evidence to suggest it is an illegal pyramid scheme

Apple removes app created by Andrew Tate::Legal firm had said Real World Portal encouraged misogyny and there was evidence to suggest it is an illegal pyramid scheme

  • @[email protected]English
    1•1 year ago

    They can go the the next city over, or move, or heck, open their own cafe where all their nazi friends can hangout and not bother us. But, you cannot just open your 3rd party app store for iOS devices, or create your own OS for all your friends to use (well, you can, but … you’d probably agree even opening your own cafe is much easier than taking on one of the largest corporations in America).

    If that cafe (or chain) had a near monopoly on open mics, and somehow prevented others from having open mic nights, then yes, I’d say they should allow any protected free speech, but I should say they shouldn’t be allow to get to that point.

    • Flying SquidEnglish
      0•1 year ago

      Ah, so your solution to the supporting a human trafficker problem is to go somewhere else unless there’s nowhere else to go. Not to stop the human trafficker from making money. Interesting.

      • @[email protected]English
        1•1 year ago

        The solution is to have a court of law convict him. Where the hell did you get those things you wrote? I never said them for sure.

        • Flying SquidEnglish
          0•1 year ago

          If he’s convicted, he can still make money off of his app. How about not allowing him to do that? Too anti-free speech?

          • @[email protected]English
            1•1 year ago

            If he’s convicted, or if I judge orders it before he’s convicted, then the app goes down. It shouldn’t be up to Apple because of the monopoly / walled garden they created.

            If they just allowed 3rd party apps and/or sideloading apps, none of this would be a concern and I’d be 100% ok with Apple taking it off their store.

            • Flying SquidEnglish
              0•1 year ago

              You’re leaving it up to Apple if he’s convicted too. Either way it’s up to Apple. They aren’t legally required to get rid of an app of a convicted rapist and human trafficker. So what’s the difference?

              • @[email protected]English
                1•1 year ago

                They aren’t legally required to get rid of an app of a convicted rapist and human trafficker.

                I’m arguing that they should be legally required to take it down in that case if ordered by a judge, and also, that they should be legally required to let users install whatever app they want on their device, either side loading, 3rd party stores, or whatever.

                Currently these aren’t true, but one can dream

                • Flying SquidEnglish
                  0•1 year ago

                  if ordered by a judge

                  So as long as the judge doesn’t say he can’t make money from his app, Apple should keep up the app making money for the convicted rapist and human trafficker. Got it.

                  • @[email protected]English
                    1•1 year ago

                    Judges aren’t perfect, and our justice system isn’t perfecr, but it’s the best we got… people do get away with murder sometimes, but that’s a whole different story that I don’t think belongs here

                    Got it.

                    We’re adults (I hope), let’s behave like such and not put words in each other’s mouth. I didn’t say any of those words and you know it.