I’m usually opposed to government regulation in tech or giving the government power more in general.
But I don’t see any negative consequences of passing a law saying a platform must provide a reason with documentation if a paying user is banned. There also must be an independent review board that is answerable to the board of directors. But not the CEO.
On the other hand, it came out in the Epic case that there is “no duty to deal”. Meaning you can’t force a company to do business with anyone as long as it isn’t for a protected reason.
The government can’t and shouldn’t force a company to do business with someone as in the Walmart case. Would you want the government to force a health or drug store to sell cigarettes?
But I don’t see any negative consequences of passing a law saying a platform must provide a reason with documentation if a paying user is banned. There also must be an independent review board that is answerable to the board of directors. But not the CEO.
On the other hand, it came out in the Epic case that there is “no duty to deal”. Meaning you can’t force a company to do business with anyone as long as it isn’t for a protected reason.
The government can’t and shouldn’t force a company to do business with someone as in the Walmart case. Would you want the government to force a health or drug store to sell cigarettes?