Legal firm had said Real World Portal encouraged misogyny and there was evidence to suggest it is an illegal pyramid scheme

Apple removes app created by Andrew Tate::Legal firm had said Real World Portal encouraged misogyny and there was evidence to suggest it is an illegal pyramid scheme

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    Okay. What if it’s the only cafe with an open mic night in town? It’s not a big city. Should they allow the Nazi? Otherwise, it lends itself for abuse, right?

    • ilmagico@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      They can go the the next city over, or move, or heck, open their own cafe where all their nazi friends can hangout and not bother us. But, you cannot just open your 3rd party app store for iOS devices, or create your own OS for all your friends to use (well, you can, but … you’d probably agree even opening your own cafe is much easier than taking on one of the largest corporations in America).

      If that cafe (or chain) had a near monopoly on open mics, and somehow prevented others from having open mic nights, then yes, I’d say they should allow any protected free speech, but I should say they shouldn’t be allow to get to that point.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        1 year ago

        Ah, so your solution to the supporting a human trafficker problem is to go somewhere else unless there’s nowhere else to go. Not to stop the human trafficker from making money. Interesting.

        • ilmagico@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          1 year ago

          The solution is to have a court of law convict him. Where the hell did you get those things you wrote? I never said them for sure.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldEnglish
            11·
            1 year ago

            If he’s convicted, he can still make money off of his app. How about not allowing him to do that? Too anti-free speech?

            • ilmagico@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              1 year ago

              If he’s convicted, or if I judge orders it before he’s convicted, then the app goes down. It shouldn’t be up to Apple because of the monopoly / walled garden they created.

              If they just allowed 3rd party apps and/or sideloading apps, none of this would be a concern and I’d be 100% ok with Apple taking it off their store.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldEnglish
                11·
                1 year ago

                You’re leaving it up to Apple if he’s convicted too. Either way it’s up to Apple. They aren’t legally required to get rid of an app of a convicted rapist and human trafficker. So what’s the difference?

                • ilmagico@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  1·
                  1 year ago

                  They aren’t legally required to get rid of an app of a convicted rapist and human trafficker.

                  I’m arguing that they should be legally required to take it down in that case if ordered by a judge, and also, that they should be legally required to let users install whatever app they want on their device, either side loading, 3rd party stores, or whatever.

                  Currently these aren’t true, but one can dream

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldEnglish
                    11·
                    1 year ago

                    if ordered by a judge

                    So as long as the judge doesn’t say he can’t make money from his app, Apple should keep up the app making money for the convicted rapist and human trafficker. Got it.