On Thursday, a district court judge denied Parler’s motion for a temporary restraining order against Amazon, which put the conservative social media platform on air last week for breaking its terms of service by inciting violence after the siege of the US Capitol on January 6.
Parler’s motion was attached to the broader lawsuit against Amazon Cloud Services, alleging conspiracy to restrict trade; Breach of contract; and torturous interference. When considering a restraining order, Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein, a judge at the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle, had to determine the likelihood that Parler would finally prevail over his claims. She said the service was out of luck on all three counts.
Related Story
‘The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel’ begins production in season 4
“The Court explicitly rejects any suggestion that the balance of actions or the public interest favors AWS ‘obligation to host the type of violent and abusive content in question in this case, particularly in light of the recent US Capitol riots. This event was a tragic reminder that inflamed rhetoric can – more quickly and easily than many of us expected – turn a legal protest into a violent uprising, ”wrote the judge.
Regarding the first allegation, the judge said, Parler has failed to demonstrate that he is likely to succeed on the merits of his conspiracy action under the Sherman Act that Amazon and Twitter – which permanently suspended former President Donald Trump’s account for inciting the Disorderly capitol – acted together. “The evidence he presented in support of the complaint is getting smaller and smaller and challenged by AWS. It is important to note that Parler did not present any evidence that AWS and Twitter acted together intentionally – or even at all – to restrict trade … In short, Parler made only tenuous and factually inaccurate speculations in support of a breach of the Law Sherman. “
She said Parler does not deny that the content posted on her platform violated the terms of her agreement with Amazon, claiming only that AWS did not warn Parler that Parler was in violation and gave Parler 30 days to remedy, as stated by Parler É required. But she notes that the service agreement authorizes AWS to terminate “immediately after notification”. The social media platform “failed to raise more than the smallest speculation that AWS actions were taken for an improper purpose or by improper means”.
She also had doubts about the evidence that Parler presented to support her claim of torturous interference.
Amazon classified a Parler lawsuit as “without merit” and the facts “unambiguous”.
In a lawsuit in response to the Parler lawsuit, lawyers for the company led by Jeff Bezos said the Parler lawsuit “is not about suppressing speech or stifling views. This is not a conspiracy to restrict trade. Instead, this case is about Parler’s demonstrated reluctance and inability to remove content that threatens public security from Amazon Web Services (AWS) servers, such as by inciting and planning the rape, torture and murder of appointed public officials and citizens private. “
Parler, a young service launched in 2018, saw its user base grow as conservative voices, QAnon acolytes and stop-steal conspiracy theorists first became disillusioned with traditional social media, then found their chief conspirator blocked on platforms , including Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Snapchat. Apple and Google removed Parler from their app stores.
It is unclear when Parler will return. Its homepage points out technical difficulties and says: “Now seems to be the right time to remind all of you – lovers and haters – why we started this platform. We believe that privacy is fundamental and freedom of expression essential, especially on social networks. Our aim has always been to provide a non-partisan public square where individuals can enjoy and exercise their rights for both. “
Parler CEO John Matze told Fox News on Sunday night that he was confident the service would be back by the end of the month.