Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday May 04 2018, @10:27AM   Printer-friendly
from the Going-to-ground dept.

As related at Fast Company

Sartorially-championed white nationalist Richard Spencer just got punched in the face–this time, in the figurative sense.

The web provider GoDaddy has taken down the alt-right figurehead’s web domain, the appropriately named altright.com.

“It is our determination that altright.com crossed the line and encouraged and promoted violence in a direct and threatening manner,” a GoDaddy spokesperson told BuzzFeed.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by zocalo on Friday May 04 2018, @12:43PM (17 children)

    by zocalo (302) on Friday May 04 2018, @12:43PM (#675619)
    Ideology may or may not be the real motivation here, but this isn't quite the same situation as GoDaddy are claiming that the site breached their perfectly legal AUP re. incitement to violence rather than an ideological reason as justification for the termination of service. If Richard Spencer wanted to challenge it on ideological grounds using the gay cake as a precedent then he'd need to somehow show that this was politically motivated and absolutely nothing to do with the AUP and convince a judge to agree with that conclusion. It'd probably be easier (and cheaper) to just find a suitable bullet-proof hosting provider that is willing to deal with the occassional DDoS than it is for lawyers and the courts.
    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Informative=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by meustrus on Friday May 04 2018, @02:17PM (12 children)

    by meustrus (4961) on Friday May 04 2018, @02:17PM (#675660)

    Ideology is not a constitutionally-protected category. Sure, the government can't keep you from espousing it, but GoDaddy is not the government and is perfectly within their rights to discriminate based on ideology.

    --
    If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
    • (Score: 3, Informative) by zocalo on Friday May 04 2018, @02:42PM (4 children)

      by zocalo (302) on Friday May 04 2018, @02:42PM (#675673)
      Tue, but my point was that it doesn't really matter either way. Regardless of whether there's legal standing for an ideological based ban or not, and regardless of the real reason for the action, GoDaddy didn't state that they kicked Spencer on ideological grounds - they said they did so for a breach of it's AUP for incitement to violence, so not only would Spencer have to rely on a shaky legal precedent, but also demonstrate that was the real reason his site was dropped.
      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
      • (Score: 1, Troll) by wisnoskij on Friday May 04 2018, @04:09PM (3 children)

        by wisnoskij (5149) <{jonathonwisnoski} {at} {gmail.com}> on Friday May 04 2018, @04:09PM (#675709)

        But that is complete BS.

        First off, godaddy is big. I am sure they host many terrorist organization websites.

        But most importantly, I have never even heard this guy speak a single sentence, and even I know that he is known for his anti-violence rhetoric.

        • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday May 04 2018, @04:43PM (2 children)

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Friday May 04 2018, @04:43PM (#675725) Journal

          I am sure they host many terrorist organization websites.

          I have zero citations to offer, but I am equally sure.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @06:32PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @06:32PM (#675799)

            I am sure they host many terrorist organization websites.

            I have zero citations to offer, but I am equally sure.

            Wow! Classic Runaway! Cocksure of something he knows nothing about! If only we could bottle this bliss!

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @07:13AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @07:13AM (#676005)

              Dude can you like register a login so we have a name we can jeer at?
              Kkthnxbai

    • (Score: 0, Troll) by VLM on Friday May 04 2018, @03:22PM (3 children)

      by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Friday May 04 2018, @03:22PM (#675699)

      Leftists want to look bad to the independent voters in the 2020 elections. Win every tiny meaningless battle, lose every war...

      • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @03:37PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @03:37PM (#675702)

        Leftists want to look bad to the independent voters in the 2020 elections. Win every tiny meaningless battle, lose every war...

        Hmm ... so you think anyone who is against the incitement of violence must be a leftist. That's your right ...

        ... but I'm pretty sure this is a business decision for GoDaddy, and not a political one. You see, if there is any form of boycott and GoDaddy looses a few thousand customers (or more) they lose quite a bit of money. Those domain renewals cost GoDaddy pennies and their gross profit is extremely high. Plus, their domain customers are sitting ducks for GoDaddy's shitty "Hey, you need this! And this! And don't you want this?!?" marketing-during-checkout blitz.

        Also, if there is enough of a backlash GoDaddy can lose the ability to buy ads during the Super Bowl or other large media events.

        • (Score: 2, Interesting) by unauthorized on Friday May 04 2018, @05:04PM (1 child)

          by unauthorized (3776) on Friday May 04 2018, @05:04PM (#675737)

          but I'm pretty sure this is a business decision for GoDaddy, and not a political one. You see, if there is any form of boycott and GoDaddy looses a few thousand customers (or more) they lose quite a bit of money.

          Ah, so it's a bussiness decision to avoid political boycotts? What if that some pro-gay site was "inciting faggotry" and decided to censor them? I'm sure you'll be all up in arms about it. But if it's someone you dislike it, then it's okay to do it? If so, then you sir, are an opportunistic scoundrel with no principles of their own.

          I for one will not shed any tears for Richard Spenser, but GoDaddy has yet again proven themselves as an organization that will not protect their consumers. Were social norms to suddenly turn against any group of people you feel entitled to protection, then GD will be the first to stab them right in the back, just as they are willing to do so to Spenser. The tools of oppression you choose to legitimize today will invariably be used to oppress you tomorrow.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @05:18PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @05:18PM (#675746)

            I'm not getting "all up in arms" about this or any actions a company like GoDaddy takes. The free market can, should and will sort these things out.

            As far as "inciting faggorty" is concerned, that is the prime directive of the gay agenda.

    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday May 04 2018, @04:41PM (1 child)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Friday May 04 2018, @04:41PM (#675724) Journal

      Ideology isn't protected, but political affiliation is. Once again - Spencer is a douche, but his nazi ass has political grounding.

      • (Score: 4, Informative) by meustrus on Friday May 04 2018, @05:02PM

        by meustrus (4961) on Friday May 04 2018, @05:02PM (#675735)

        When it comes to private businesses, the law that generally applies is the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [ourdocuments.gov], which does not protect political affiliation. Specifically, it requires that government and private businesses not discriminate based on "race, color, religion, sex, or national origin" (at its most restrictive; religion and sex are excluded from some protections).

        The closest that this law comes to protecting political affiliation is in TITLE VIII, which outlines the collection of voter registration data and stipulates that:

        ...no person shall be compelled to disclose his race, color, national origin, or questioned about his political party affiliation, how he voted, or the reasons therefore, nor shall any penalty be imposed for his failure or refusal to make such disclosure.

        IANAL, and this is not a very detailed read, so I could be wrong. Individual states also have stronger protections sometimes, but as far as I know I haven't lived in one that protects political affiliation. If you know of part of the law that protects political affiliation, please show us all what part that is.

        --
        If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @10:26PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @10:26PM (#675887)

      If they went after the other hate groups like BLM and AntiFa then I *might* cut them some slack. They only go after random ones that it is currently popular to not like. They may be free to not carry him. He is *also* free to bitch a storm up about it. Not only is he free to do so, he will. People like this thrive on the idea they are persecuted. Strip away the racial hatred you end up with a fairly run of the mill socialist group. Asking for workers rights and seizing of companies to be run by the gov.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @05:38PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @05:38PM (#675755)

    As any rational person knows, *incitement to violence* is a bullshit concept. It implies that people can be compelled to act by mere words. If we have no free will, then we are just bald apes.

    • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday May 04 2018, @06:00PM (1 child)

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Friday May 04 2018, @06:00PM (#675771) Journal

      You can sometimes incite people to do things.

      I'm trying to incite you to reply and disagree with me. Maybe that is the word provoke instead of incite?

      +1 Inciteful

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @10:02PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @10:02PM (#675877)

        :-) Your incitement and even provocation are irrelevant. I have to choose to respond. All my reactions are either by choice or conditioning. People who claim to be incited to violence are actually conditioned (or have a personal predilection) to violence. Everything you do is by personal choice or conditioning. Don't try to pass blame to the other guy for the choices you make.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @12:25PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @12:25PM (#676051)

    ..as GoDaddy are claiming that the site breached their perfectly legal AUP re. incitement to violence rather than an ideological reason as justification for the termination of service. If Richard Spencer wanted to challenge it on ideological grounds using the gay cake as a precedent then he'd need to somehow show that this was politically motivated and absolutely nothing to do with the AUP and convince a judge to agree with that conclusion.

    Forget the cake (insert usual Portal reference here...), it's a bit of a 'Red Herring'. The real problem for GoDaddy if the suited sharks get involved is that they will have to prove in a Court of Law that they actively and impartially enforce this AUP condition globally, otherwise this will look like victimisation and an attempt at bypassing the First Amendment rights of this character.

    So, anyone up for a game of 'hunt the extremists breaking this 'incitement to violence' AUP breach' on GoDaddy hosted sites/domains/whatever?
    All 52 million (or so) of them?