Silicon Valley Terms of Service (TOS) Agreements Found To be Screwing Consumers
By Mark Wright and Emily Ponter
Mountain View – CA – Robert is a lawyer at a large Silicon Valley law firm located in Palo Alto, California. He has one job. He specializes in screwing the public.
Robert is one of a handful of legal specialists who work for Google, Facebook, Linkedin, Twitter and big “campaign tech”.
He writes the Terms of Service (Known as the TOS) that consumers think is supposed to “protect them”. The TOS does nothing for the consumer and everything for the tech company.
The TOS is designed to covertly eliminate all consumer rights in court and to give the big campaign tech company 100% arbitrary discretion to manipulate their behavior against the public.
The TOS is the ultimate back-door escape clause for the corrupt. Essentially, it is created to be so obscure, incomprehensible and flighty that any company can claim any possible slight is a “violation of the TOS”.
If you say something negative about a political candidate that the tech company billionaire is financing, you will suddenly be found to be in violation of the TOS. If you support “Black Lives Matter” but the venture capitalist who scrapes the profits off of that tech company is an NRA director, then ‘bang’ you will be found in violation of the TOS.
The U.S. Congress has been asked to investigate the TOS format an to come up with a universal TOS that protects the consumer.
While the TOS has been turned into a political censorship tool, the Congress has now become aware of the fact that a group of Silicon Valley companies are censoring the news, consumer access and publishers for their own personal political cover-ups.
The United Nations and many whole nations have now declared a free and UN-manipulated internet to be “natural human right.”
What is to be done with the Google’s, Amazon’s, Smashwords, and other’s who wield their TOS as a weapon of censorship in order to prevent law enforcement, public representatives, journalists and other servants of the public from receiving complete sets of information, witness reports, studies and investigations.
The ACLU is looking at law suits over such public information manipulations. Publishers and citizens groups are looking at similar lawsuits.
By attacking and censoring those whose opinions a web provider disagrees with, that web provider has become the Stasi, or the Nazi, of the internet. The internet is a free public roadway that the manipulative web provider has now put a highwayman’s pirate roadblock across.
No matter the contrivances of the manipulated TOS agreement that the web provider may Toss at those they do not agree with, the truth is clear: Even one censorship action destroys the credibility of the Google, Smashwords, or Twitter forever.
The ACLU should sue such parties.
The U.S. Congress should investigate and regulate such parties.
The FCC should punish such parties.
The authors and publishers attacked should sue those web providers.
The public should shun those web providers.
The freedom to censor, that a compromised web provider exhibits, must be met with the public’s option to put them out of business by boycotting them.
The exhortations and bleeding heart protestations and rationalizations of the impassioned web provider who wrings his hands in despair are laughable. The Google or Smashwords realization that they must no longer use their servers as a private propaganda machine are quite amusing for outsiders to watch.
No company has the right to limit free speech. No company has the right to violate the US Constitution.
The punishment must be swift, total and firm!
