|
|
|
|
|
|
by nickheer
1384 days ago
|
|
|
An airline or UPS can absolutely say “we don’t like the contents of what you are shipping so we refuse to transport it”. UPS will not ship marijuana, even for medical purposes, even in Canada where it is entirely legal. It won’t ship watches over $500 or ammunition. I disagree with turning platforms into common carriers. As I wrote, I think this misses the issue: a protocol should be a common carrier, but a specific provider has no obligation to host things it doesn’t want to or do not make sense for certain territories. |
|
|
Cf.:
>An important legal requirement for common carrier as public provider is that it cannot discriminate, that is refuse the service unless there is some compelling reason.
ibid
I suppose you can make "compelling reason" arguments for some things, but the default is carry.
Like, you may as well say "Well there are 'compelling reasons' exceptions so theoretically people can do the exact opposite of what the law says."