It is already bouncing back up.
The more likely reason is people realizing their profits.

I have a hard time accepting you actually believe anything you wrote. I can't fathom you really believe that.

Merkel's statement is correct within the framework of the German constitution and German law.
It is wrong, tho, within the framework of the USA constitution and law.

Which is "morally correct"? I'm not qualified to state. Specially since moral is ultimately individual.

However, a law can only regulate a constitutional right (or guarantee) if the constitution grants the law powers to do so, which is not the case here. Twitter's (and other's) decision is perfectly compatible with the USA Constitution and law.

"Oh", you might say, "it should be different!". Ok, there are constitutional means to change it. The constitution can me reformed via amendments. There as rules in place for that.

What you cannot do is apply one country's rules to another, one country's law to another, one country's constitution to another. Even if you think said country's constitution is better.

So, should things be different? Considering I'm the ones that defend that human rights should be horizontally applicable, then yes, they should be different. The US constitution should be amended to cover that horizontalization of human rights, which would also deal with several other issues. However, until that new amendment is in place, the current rule of law should be applicable.

If you think things should be different, make sure to exercise your civic right and talk to your representative about making changes.

Twitter's actions were right (within the law and and compatible with the constitution of the country they exist).

PS. Yes, I'm a lawyer with a masters in constitucional law.. No, this is not legal advice.

I would moderate you "Insightful" if I could. :D

The first 4 pages, including "NATURE OF THE ACTION", which are enough to show minimum legal grounds.
I know we are on slashdot, but I wouldn't have commented without reading at least that much.

I will concede that stupidity and incompetence are likely explanations also. Maybe even more likely.

It is only possible to have an issue if you can show monopoly practices. Thus, you could, very weakly, make an antitrust case between facebook and twitter for cancelled accounts.
On the other hand, AWS service is a completely different issue. It is like alleging anti competitive practices between a gas station and a bakery.
Because that is the hearth of the antitrust laws: to stop anticompetitive practices that lead to monopolies.
No yeah, nothing to do with AWS.
Also, since they were booted for repeated and clear violations of terms of service that are both legally sound and are not restrictive of otherwise permissive actions, the motivation for the boot is clearly demonstrated. For they to have an antitrust case regarding facebook and twitter they would have to show that those terms had the direct intent or indirect result of reducing competition. Which they clearly are not.

I'm sorry if I'm being vague. I'm trying my best to avoid lawyer-speak.

That is not how antitrust laws work.
This is 100% a marketing stunt.

PS: Yes, I AM a lawyer with a masters in constitutional law. No, this is not legal advice, since you didn't pay me.

Mass Effect: Andromeda... No Man's Sky...
This seems to be a new trend. Or maybe not so new, but much more common than it once was.

I was thinking there is no way this is not satire. Just some comic playing a funny one. I mean, have people read the website? It is amazingly funny.

Then I remembered Depak Chopra.

Dark times when you are not sure if this level of bs is a joke (if it is, kudos) or someone actually conning other people.

Trump will fight anyone that opposes him. Anyone who threatens to steal the spotlight for a second.
This is 50% ego and 50% wanting to blame someone else for his blunders.
He had the information and failed to act on it. He has the information now and is saying business will reopen.
This has nothing to do with the many failures by the WHO (nothing new there, there are books and books on all their mistakes during the H1N1 pandemic) and everything to do with Trump.

Mea culpa. I meant to write "not coronavirus".
For some reason my spell check changed to "not a virus" and I failed to review before hitting submit.
I guess the Preview button is there for a reason.

The basis for the most common cold is... not a virus.
The basis for the most common flu is... influenza.

Actually, no. Facebook does have offices in Brazil, and if very much susceptible to all legal measures.
Why would anyone even consider the need to block access to a company to hold it legally responsible?
Brazil is not that much of a backwater place. Companies actually do business here.

Oh, a legal precedent costs much more than the case dollar amount. It opens the doors for other fines and lawsuits.