![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
logistically it would be to much for a site to filter everysingle ad, and im sure im the terms of argeement it would say something about what you advertise yadda yadda yadda, in the end we're not liable. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
The check and balances of this would be that the public would boycott Amazon over this enough to hit their books to force the organization to drop the book. Thus you keep freedom of speech but public opposition to the company policy would invoke the change.
The problem is that i would say the majority of people would find this immoral (the book) the media in which we rely on does not share the same values as the general public.
__________________
Level 100 Characters: Horde -- Alliance -- Balrin|Brondor|Gronthor|Ironshot| |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
According to that CNN article, part of Amazon's guidelines for what is not allowed say:
Quote:
The point of the first amendment was to provide everyone with protection to do whatever they want as long as it doesn't infringe on that same right of someone else, as well as the law (provided the law is constitutional). Someone buying the book, or Amazon selling it, isn't what I see as wrong, but if something happened as a result of someone owning the book I believe the author should be held responsible like in that case with the book "Hit Man". If you're going to instruct someone how to do something and publish it for anyone to obtain, you should be responsible for the repercussions of that decision. People are held responsible for yelling FIRE in a crowded area if anyone is injured, I see it as the same issue.
__________________
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b3...ololololol.jpg http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b3...neisracist.jpg Last edited by Onion; 11-12-2010 at 11:56 AM. |
![]() |
|
|