[jscottmiller]

>They repeatedly demonstrate that they are a company of bullies, with how they ban people from their service that don't conform to the left orthodoxy.

So the manner in which they conduct their private business, which is well within the rule of law, makes them ineligible for protection from those violating securities and contract law?

[wutbrodo]

> makes them ineligible for protection from those violating securities and contract law

GP said he doesn't feel sorry for them. He said nothing about legal protections being inapplicable to Twitter. You just brazenly made this up out of whole cloth.

[762236]

I said that I don't feel sorry for Twitter. The law should apply without consideration of political ideology.

[jonathankoren]

What law are you talking about? The first amendment? It doesn't apply to private actors. Not only does it not apply to nongovernmental entities, it SHOULD NOT apply to them. To do so would be government compelled speach.

[762236]

I'm referring to the law in the context of the purchase offer from Elon, as the person I'm replying to quite clearly stated "securities and contract law".

[TechBro8615]

It’s not a violation of contract law to sue the other party. That lawsuit may find that the complainant did violate contract law, but the act of bringing the lawsuit is not in itself a violation.

So at this point, pending adjudication, Twitter has not been “denied protection.” The court is the protection. The two parties are suing each other, and the court will decide the appropriate remedies for whatever each of the parties has been “denied” due to any willful breach of contract by the other.