Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Social Media Site Gab Sues Google For Antitrust Violations Following Ban From Play Store (washingtonpost.com)

Posted by msmash on from the bold-accusations dept.

The social media site Gab.ai is accusing Google of violating federal antitrust laws when the tech giant booted Gab from the Google Play Store, according to lawsuit filed this week. From a report: The legal action is the latest salvo in an escalating battle between right-leaning technologists and leaders against Silicon Valley giants such as Facebook and Google. Gab alleges in the lawsuit that "Google deprives competitors, on a discriminatory basis, of access to the App Store, which an essential facility or resource." "Google is the biggest threat to the free flow of information," Gab chief executive Andrew Torba said in a statement. "Gab started to fight against the big tech companies in the marketplace, and their monopolistic conduct has forced us to bring the fight to the courtroom." Alternative source.

3 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Who is Gab? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0, Troll

    Gab isn't really a free speech platform. It's a right leaning speech platform, that bans left leaning users and is made up of people who were kicked of Twitter for trolling.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  2. Re:Very smart by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0, Troll

    Google blacklisted them because they made themselves into a cesspit of racist abuse and Nazi propaganda, which is against the terms of service of the Play store. The same reason that there is no PornHub app on there.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  3. Re:Sauce for the goose by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Troll

    Snopes looked at this: http://www.snopes.com/obama-mu...

    The issue seems to be that because it was easy for the delivery company to accommodate the religious requirements they should have. In the case of the bakery didn't argue that the burden would be undue, merely that they didn't want to do it because of the message.

    It could certainly do with some clarification, rather than two separate and seemingly (but not actually) contradictory outcomes.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC