It's all the local phone company does. It alerts the callee, but the callee has to pick up the handset. When WU still delivered a telegram, one level of common carriage service stipulated that it would alert a telegram recipient by phone call to the presence of a message at his local WU office.
Not a tech nerd with only user knowledge of the Internet/WWW system and no knowledge of common carriage law.
Twitter software puts the digital personal literary property on the display of the recipient's computing device. As I keep repeating, you have not shot down anything. You continue to show ignorance of front-end software and common carriage law.
Twitter performs end to end electronic message common carriage of digital personal literary property.
It's not relevant to anything. Until I started taking graduate math courses, my math teachers lived in fear of me.
It is necessary to know something about the issues to destroy an argument.
I am irritated that the anti-common carriage argument is often reduced to a vacuous slogan.
Why don't you study common carriage law? It's often important for rides, elevators, and escalators to be common carriers. Common carriers owe passengers a heightened degree of care to keep passengers and others safe. Common carriers of merchandise and other property are in a similar albeit sometimes more complex situation. It's important that common carriage law be respected.
Do you know why?
We already have a technology Court of Appeals. It's called the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, but it only deals with tech in the context of patent law. In any case, no judge can encompass all areas of technology. According to the Constitution, SCOTUS is the highest court, and every appellate decision could be reviewed by SCOTUS. A party in a case or controversy is responsible for providing an expert when it's necessary.
Yet I work with attorneys 1. that have never used a social medium platform, 2. that don't know what the Internet is, and 3. that have a slight acquaintance with the phrase "World Wide Web". Judges can be less acquainted. As a technology expert, I explain matters of fact.
My political memory goes back to Eisenhower. I liked both Eisenhower and also Stevenson. I like Kennedy, Johnson, Ford, Carter (even though he screwed up on Iran royally), Reagan (until he checked out mentally), GHWB, and Trump (initially because he was entertaining until he turned scary). I disliked Nixon because he was a crook. I knew GWB personally and considered him unfit. I have long considered Biden a hypocrite, who feigns sympathy. I am exactly in the middle on Obama. Although he never became president, I have always liked Bernie Sanders.
Judge Schuck agreed -- as I do -- that there is no way to stretch the legal definition of a public utility to include Google.
The World Wide Web terminology is still alive. It is easier to refer to the Internet/WWW.
Lisp is often a purely interpreted language. In my sophomore year, long ago I wrote a compiler that compiled Lisp code into C code. While C is usually a compiled language, it can be implement in an interpreter. So is Lisp or C an interpreted or compiled? Do you see
Please learn some facts about the law and the service which an ISP provides to its customers and third parties. An ISP has implicit contract in fact with all of its customers. This contract obligates the ISP properly to implement and to perform Internet packet carriage and routing. The Twitter common carriage service reasonably assumes that Internet actors obey the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Thus Twitter even more than the local telephone company controls end-to-end delivery because Twitter uses TCP VCs set up by its customers. This reliance is more than enough to give Twitter end-to-end control of delivery of digital personal literary property from one user to another.
The term first appeared in 2014. A quasi-common carrier is an entity that provides both common carriage and private or contract carriage. I provide a expert report of a matter of fact, but I don't advance an opinion before a Court because I am not a lawyer or a judge. I can advance an opinion at the USPTO because I am a registered patent agent. I find it useful to know the literature in the fields, where I work. The literature of electronic common carriage of digital personal literary property goes back to the 1830s. Electronic common carriage of digital personal literary property includes:
I have designed a CPU. A CPU designer is a computer scientist. A CPU designer for a CISC architecture creates a program for each instruction. If the CPU is for WISC device, the program for each instruction can be rewritten. You know an extremely tiny part of computer science and are allowing that extremely tiny amount of knowledge interfere with your understanding of the big picture.
Here are the areas of law that one must address to consider whether a social medium platform engages in unlawful actions. 1. Public utility law -- doesn't violate. 2. Public franchise law (natural monopoly law) -- doesn't violate. 3. civil rights law -- violates. 4. public accommodation law -- violates. 5. common carrier law -- violates.
That's The Idea -- If Twitter is a Common Carrier, it can't evaluate user literary property except in a limited way
Section 230 tells us that requesting common carriage of obscene literary property is probably analogous to requesting common carriage of hazardous material. A message common carrier has some discretion but not with respect to common carriage of literary property, which is not analogous to hazardous material.