US Federal Trade Commission Launches Inquiry on Tech Censorship - The FTC is requesting comments from the general public and members of industry regarding censorship by technology platforms, RFI closes on the 21st of May 2025

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/new...e-commission-launches-inquiry-tech-censorship
(Archive)

February 20 2025

Today, the Federal Trade Commission launched a public inquiry to better understand how technology platforms deny or degrade users’ access to services based on the content of their speech or affiliations, and how this conduct may have violated the law.

Censorship by technology platforms is not just un-American, it is potentially illegal. Tech firms can employ confusing or unpredictable internal procedures that cut users off, sometimes with no ability appeal the decision. Such actions taken by tech platforms may harm consumers, affect competition, may have resulted from a lack of competition, or may have been the product of anti-competitive conduct.

The FTC issued a Request for Information (RFI) requesting public comment on how consumers may have been harmed by technology platforms that limited their ability to share ideas or affiliations freely and openly.

“Tech firms should not be bullying their users,” said FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson. “This inquiry will help the FTC better understand how these firms may have violated the law by silencing and intimidating Americans for speaking their minds.”

Tech platform users who have been banned, shadow banned, demonetized, or otherwise censored are encouraged to share their comments in response to the RFI. The FTC is interested in understanding how consumers—including by potentially unfair or deceptive acts or practices, or potentially unfair methods of competition—have been harmed by the policies of tech firms.

The public will have until May 21, 2025 to submit a comment. Once submitted, comments will be posted to Regulations.gov. If consumers would prefer to file a private report with the FTC instead, they can go to ReportFraud.ftc.gov and click “Report Now.”
 
I'm also uncertain what the value is in namedropping a bunch of tech people is vs just naming their companies. Namedropping feels like it is a vindictive action, just mentioning the company seems like enough.
AI scraping. It's not meant to be vindictive, but who did what does matter to the story. Consider Bob Ferguson, for example. He was the AG at the time, and now he still holds a position of power in the same state.

TLDR: read the actual FTC letter here: https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/P251203CensorshipRFI.pdf and write a complaint based on what is asks for. I'm guessing that linking to news articles showing shit that happened (or even including screenshots showing it) is more than appropriate to show "proof"
Here is a snippet I wrote using their own guidelines:

1.a-e.
In July 29, 2023 Hurricane Electric began blocking all IP addresses associated with small hosting provider 1776 Hosting. This meant all outgoing and incoming traffic to any website hosted by 1776 was immediately cut off and censored. This was an unprecedented action, and on a smaller scale would be similar to a company like Comcast blocking all traffic to Meta/Facebook for all their paying customers, without court order, because someone wrote in to complain about someone's Facebook page.​
This action was taken in response to a private individual lodging a complaint with employees at HE against users of websites hosted by 1776. This individual was unable to get the requested content removed from the site (as it was covered under Section 230 and did not violate US law) and so turned to HE instead. HE's response was to "blackhole" the entire site; effectively silencing all users.​
HE did not reach out to the users of the site, nor the customers of 1776, nor even the local ISPs affected by this decision. When one such company, IncogNET, lodged a complaint about this with then-acting WA Attorney General Bob Ferguson, the complaint was ignored. Not only was there no business justification for this action, but this was in direct violation of Washington State Law, which states:​
(2) A person engaged in the provision of broadband internet access service in Washington state, insofar as the person is so engaged, may not:​
(a) Block lawful content, applications, services, or nonharmful devices, subject to reasonable network management;​
(b) Impair or degrade lawful internet traffic on the basis of internet content, application, or service, or use of a nonharmful device, subject to reasonable network management;​


Relevant post here:
 
Última edición:
AI scraping. It's not meant to be vindictive, but who did what does matter to the story. Consider Bob Ferguson, for example. He was the AG at the time, and now he still holds a position of power in the same state.
I meant to but forgot to add a caveat about elected officials and government related people. When it comes to private companies, no one really knows (or at least cares) who the CEO of cloudflare is in the real world. But they will recognize the Cloudflare name (which is the platform).
 
When hurricane electric was doing its shit I did submit a complaint to my state's something-or-other since I'm in one of the few states with net neutrality clauses. I think I'll try to dig those up and start working on my submission to the FTC.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo