S C A R B O R O U G H v s. F A C E B O O K, I N C.
“The Most Important Lawsuit You’ve Never Heard About!”
by T. Matthew Phillips, Attorney-at-Law
SCARBOROUGH vs. FACEBOOK, Inc.
Christie Scarborough, Greg Fessler, Rudy Twomoon, and Gena Simkins are suing Facebook, Inc.! “Yay!” [Scarborough vs. Facebook, Los Angeles County Case No. BC714084] Plaintiffs argue that Facebook violates fundamental free speech rights. Plaintiff demands free speech on Facebook! Please “like” us on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/groups/2206417079629810/
AMERICA’S ONLY FREE SPEECH LAWSUIT!
This lawsuit is important because it’s America’s ONLY lawsuit seeking to enforce free speech rights on the internet. Free speech is supposed to be the cornerstone of democracy. But sadly, in America, corporate censorship is in full swing! Facebook, Google, YouTube, and Twitter — the “Internet Cartel” — are bent on eliminating constitutional rights and replacing them with “community standards.” But this is fascism! We demand free speech — and that’s why we’re suing!
TOO HOT for INFOWARS.COM!
As you can imagine, there is a 100% media blackout on this lawsuit! Not so much because it’s a TMP lawsuit, but because the topic is “free speech!” And the mainstream media hates “free speech!” They are forbidden to mention this lawsuit for any reason — not even to criticize it! And, the alternative media is likewise forbidden to mention it!! Not even Alec Jones can mention it! Why?–because “free speech” terrifies the corporatized media! And this explains why you’ve never heard about America’s only lawsuit challenging corporate censorship!
SAY “NO” to CORPORATIZED SPEECH!
All corporations hate free speech — because they hate what they can’t control! (Srsly!) Corporations see “free speech” as “un-controlled speech,” which is apparently too dangerous to the establishment! Corporations instead prefer “controlled” speech — from paid actors — parroting well-rehearsed lines — scripted by corporate script writers — and drip-fed through their teleprompters at a controlled tempo! Just say “No!” to corporatized speech!
FACEBOOK VIOLATES FREEDOM of SPEECH
Plaintiffs argue that Facebook violates freedom of speech in two ways: (1) by deleting users’ posts and pages, i.e., “censorship,” and (2) by suspending users’ ability to post, i.e., “Facebook Jail.” And so, when Facebook censors user content, Facebook commits a violation of the user’s right to free speech; and when Facebook goes on to punish the user with a “Facebook Jail” sentence, i.e., by suspending the user’s account, Facebook commits another violation of the user’s right to free speech.
The lawsuit relies on the California Constitution — NOT the First Amendment! While the First Amendment merely restrains government, the California Constitution affirmatively empowers free speech. Truth is, the State of California gives more “free speech” rights than does the federal government. (This is like “minimum wage” laws. Many states, like California, give more rights to workers than do the feds; notably, California pays a minimum wage higher than do the feds.)
“THE RIGHT to FREELY SPEAK”
Facebook is a California corporation, and therefore, Facebook must abide by California state law. And the California Constitution says—“Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects.” [See Calif. Const., Art. 1, Sec. 2]
FEDERAL INTERNET LAW
Under federal law, Facebook is deemed an interactive computer services provider, (“ICS” provider), [see 47 U.S.C. § 230(f)(2)]. And, federal law does allow ICS providers, like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, to “restrict access” to certain types of content that may be objectionable, e.g., “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, or harassing,” [see 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(2)(A)].
GOOD FAITH REQUIREMENT
And while federal law allows ICS providers, like Facebook, to “restrict access” to certain types of content that may be objectionable — federal law also imposes a “good faith” requirement, [see 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(2)]. And thus, Facebook is legally within their rights to delete your post or take down your page — provided Facebook can show that their act of censorship was undertaken in “good faith” — which is ultimately a question of fact for a jury.
LACK of GOOD FAITH
Plaintiffs argue that Facebook, in the course of deleting posts and taking-down pages, cannot show “good faith!” Why?–because Facebook stubbornly refuses to explain their hidden reasons and motives for deleting posts and taking-down pages!
FACEBOOK will LOSE THIS CASE!
Facebook cannot claim “good faith” because they utterly fail to communicate with users! And this is why Facebook will lose the case! Standing alone, the fact that Facebook never communicates with users shows bad faith!
STOP INTERNET CENSORSHIP!
Facebook’s brand of censorship, i.e., deleting posts and taking-down pages, is unlawful because Facebook fails to demonstrate “good faith” — because they explain nothing at all! (“Why was my post removed?” — Nobody knows!) And, when they sentence users to “Facebook Jail,” Facebook again fails to demonstrate “good faith” — because no federal law allows ICS providers, like Facebook, to punish their own users with 30-day account suspensions! Unless and until Facebook explains the reasons and motives that underlie its censorship practices, such practices will always remain unlawful for lack of “good faith.”
GET UP! – STAND UP!
Stand up for your rights! Join us in demanding free speech on the internet! Celebrate the most cherished right of free-thinkers — the right to “freely speak!” #GoScarborough! #GoFessler! #GoTwomoon! #GoSimkins! #YouHeardMe
READ the LAWSUIT! Click on the link below —>>
“Know your human right! Be what you come here for!”
T. Matthew Philips
Sept. 24, 2018
Produced and Directed by TMP’s Midnight Minions
in association with Chapter Eleven Productions,
Fly-By-Night Management Services, and
Neurotica Entertainment Group
“Hater gonna hate,
ain’ters gonna ain’t.”