SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the legislators-protecting-us-from-bad-things dept.
In Colorado:
Concerning the regulation of digital communications, and, in connection therewith, creating the digital communications division and the digital communications commission
Session: 2021 Regular Session
Subjects: Professions & Occupations
Telecommunications & Information Technology
Bill Summary
The bill creates the digital communications division (division) . . . On an annual basis and for a reasonable fee determined by the commission, the division shall register digital communications platforms . . . such as social media platforms or media-sharing platforms, that conduct business in Colorado . . . A digital communications platform that fails to register with the division commits a class 2 misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of up to $5,000 for each day that the violation continues.
The division shall investigate and the commission may hold hearings . . .
- Include practices that promote hate speech; undermine election integrity; disseminate intentional disinformation, conspiracy theories, or fake news; . . . .
- May include business, political, or social practices that are conducted in a manner that a person aggrieved by the practices can demonstrate are unfair or discriminatory to the aggrieved person. . . . .
- Practices that target users for purposes of collecting and disseminating users' personal data, including users' sensitive data
- Profiling users based on their personal data collected
- Selling or authorizing others to use users' personal data to provide location-based advertising or targeted advertising; or
- Using facial recognition software and other tracking technology.
The full text of the bill is here.
(Score: 1, Troll) by fakefuck39 on Thursday March 04 2021, @04:27AM (18 children)
lol a user accessing your soylent server outside of his state is not the same as you doing business in his state. are you registered as a domestic or foreign corp in CO? newsflash qherlock, even if someone buys something from you on ebay, the buyer is buying in your state. you're not doing business in his. stick to gutting fish and flunking highschool physics. business is not your thing buzzretard.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 04 2021, @06:55AM
You make an interesting point, but I'm not sure if that will be how this bill goes down.
"shall registerdigital communications platforms, which are certaincommunications-oriented online businesses, such as social mediaplatforms or media-sharing platforms, that conduct business in Colorado or own or operate services that are offered to Colorado residents."
Guess we'll see how the lawsuits turn out, probably get kicked to the Supreme Court. I would hope that only businesses from Colorado could be so regulated, and on top of that if this bill actually violates Constitutional Rights it will just get thrown out.
Silver lining is that legislative bodies are starting to take digital rights seriously.
(Score: 1) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 04 2021, @03:00PM (5 children)
You're either not a US citizen or you very poorly informed for a US citizen. Interstate jurisdictional rulings have been extremely inconsistent in Internet cases here.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by fakefuck39 on Friday March 05 2021, @05:35AM (4 children)
like physics, you failed 8th grade us history. intetstate? a company in ny getting sued for a colorado law? where sherlock, is the lawsuit? in ny for a colorado law? in colorado where there is no one to sue? interstate commerce is federally regulated. no federal law has been broken. bit it's cool buzztard. you're a guy who thinks straws work in a vacuum. you are literally a dumb blue-collar who thinks everyone is an idiot. this makes you our clown.
(Score: 1) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday March 05 2021, @10:59AM (3 children)
Pay attention to case law. Ours is pretty badly fucked up.
Also, you might want to go swimming when it warms up a bit. Dive down to the bottom. Sit there until you realize that not all atmospheres are gaseous and the implications of that.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 09 2021, @06:16PM (2 children)
I know you're thick-skinned and unlikely to be much bothered by ff39, but that user seems to thrive on always making toxic posts attacking, flaming and generally just trolling the other users of SN. He/she seems enjoy adding lots of negativity and very little to no positivity. He/she makes so many grammatical mistakes, I guess English is probably no more than his/her second language. Would you consider banning him/her and the associated IP addresses? The user could try to return under a new ID / IP by proxy, but the sockpuppetry would be obvious by their style after only a few posts. Permanent AC here.
(Score: 1) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 11 2021, @12:51PM (1 child)
Nope. Two reasons:
1) We have an ideological objection to censoring any speech that can remotely be called signal rather than noise (which is why we only ban spammers).
2) Bans, account or IP, are trivial to get around if you're looking to make a nuisance of yourself. Infinite Whack-a-Mole ceases being fun after a couple of hours.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 11 2021, @01:45PM
OK.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Thursday March 04 2021, @03:26PM (10 children)
>even if someone buys something from you on ebay, the buyer is buying in your state. you're not doing business in his.
Actually you kind of are - which is why you have to collect sales tax for his state and pay it to them. Used to be that was his responsibility, but laws change.
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Friday March 05 2021, @05:41AM (9 children)
this is false. you collect sales tax for states your corporation is in. you do not collect tax for states you have. neither does the buyer pay sales tax -that is not constitutional. some states collect voluntarily reported use tax. since the buyer is using ebay, sales tax is also collected if ebay has presence in the state.
no representation, no taxation. it is constitutionally illegal to collect tax from people who cannot vote for the tax laws. you know nothing, and are a liar.
(Score: 1) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday March 05 2021, @11:02AM (8 children)
Absolutely false. You have never had to collect local-to-the-business sales tax for interstate Internet sales. Until recently you didn't collect any at all. Now you collect it where the customer is or not at all, depending on the state.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Saturday March 06 2021, @04:03AM (7 children)
what depends in the state is whether the seller has presence in the state. meaning registered as a foreign corporation. if not, yes, you never had to collect sales tax, because a state cannot make rules for someone outside that state. like i originally said. and that is literally still the case. you're likely confused because solething you bought from out of state was tax free befor, and now is not. it's because the seller opened an office in your state. not because of a change in law. the law being the constitution. sorry retard, no new amendments in the last few years.
(Score: 1) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday March 06 2021, @04:30AM (6 children)
Still wrong in every aspect. The others I already informed you on but the constitution? Really? The constitution has literally nothing to do with state taxes except the commerce clause, and that just says congress can regulate interstate commerce.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Saturday March 06 2021, @05:00AM (5 children)
yes, the constitution says the fed gov regulates interstate commerce. exactly like you said. you're good at saying things you don't understand. a state cannot tax an entity not represented in that state. no taxation without representation. so colorado cannot pass laws and regulations for someone in jersey. what us it you're not getting here skippy? if you're in jersey and not in colorado, you can ignore anything jersey tells you to do.
literally an 8th grader knows this. then again, an 8th grader knows you can't suck through a straw in a vacuum. how was the short bus yiu took to school in 8th grade? btw, this tax thing -it's in the 8th grade constitution test you have to pass before qualifying for high school.
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/interstatetax.htm [umkc.edu]
(Score: 1) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday March 06 2021, @05:16AM (4 children)
The latest case law you have there is 1995. You might want to get current. Like, you know, South Dakota vs. Wayfair Inc. [supremecourt.gov] for starters. Let me know when you're ready to admit you didn't know what the fuck you were talking about.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Saturday March 06 2021, @05:52AM (3 children)
or you are again saying shit w/o knowing what ot means. the case you site was for a company using and advertising to out of state residents, specifically. 'buy from us sd resident, pay no tax.' the ruling said because if that, the company i said needed to register in sd as.. wait for it... a foreign corporation. like what i said in literally my first comment.
and even this was just a ruling, very limited in scope, and very specific. many rules, and all of them not allowing to tax an out of state entity, but for specific cases, saying the out if state business is actually an in-state foreign corporation, and hence should register as such. this is why most out of state online stores are... still tax free. ebay included. amazon included for places they don't have offices or warehouses.
so yet again, the thing you linked proves you wrong. here's a good summary of your case. whicj you will neither read, nor understand.
https://www.quaderno.io/blog/south-dakota-vs-wayfair-how-the-supreme-court-ruling-changes-us-sales-tax [quaderno.io]
(Score: 1) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday March 06 2021, @01:02PM (2 children)
Your own link specifically says "With the Wayfair decision, states can begin taxing remote retailers and recouping that revenue." And goes on to totally obliterate your entire argument. How fucking stupid are you?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Troll) by fakefuck39 on Sunday March 07 2021, @02:03AM (1 child)
quite smart actually. you need to look up what a foreign corporation is. which is business 101 of starting a company. the decision is about companies evading being a foreign corporation. foreign corporations have to pay taxes. as i literally said, in my original comment. in your example of soylent, with this court decision, soylent, and most businesses would Not be foreign corporations, and would not be affected by this ruling.
i am 100% sure i am 200% smarter and more informed than you. because instead of learning and understanding things you don't know and understand, you take pride in being dense, and are too lazy to put in the effort required for actual knowledge. as far as this topic, since I own an almost 20yo company that does out of state consulting and software, and have been very involved in its taxes, i was forced to learn this topic quite well. you -you are just a retard.
(Score: 1) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday March 07 2021, @08:39PM
And I've been doing the same for 25 years and know for a fact that you don't have clue one what you're talking about. Should we whip them out and measure now since you're obviously not going to change your mind now matter how many times I cite you decisions saying you're dead wrong?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.