DMCA
I recommend a reading of the following paper:
https://digitalcommons.law.uidaho.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=faculty_scholarship
To Twitter, I would strongly suggest that you learn about the DMCA and your responsibilities as an online service provider (OSP). The act incorporates and classifies any use of digital systems designed to bypass computer controls to be a DMCA violation. Thus, using a bot to bypass controls is covered in the DMCA as it prevents or circumvents access control measures in 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a) [1].
And OSP is an online service provider. The law covers anonymous trolls who bypass computer security. The ability to block and restrict systems to allow private communication is a fundamental right, and is considered sacrosanct here within the European Union.
Privacy controls are considered a right in the EU. You are in criminal breach allowing to bypass them, and we seek you to consider that the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act (OCILLA) as a portion of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act known as DMCA 512 or the DMCA take-down provisions needs to be applied swiftly. When such is not the case, the 1998 United States federal law that provided a safe harbour to online service providers (OSPs, including ISPs, internet service providers) that promptly take down content if someone alleges that it infringes his copyrights does not apply. Section 512 was added to the copyright law in Title 17 of the United States Code (Public Law №105–304, 112 Stat. 2860, 2877).
Twitter has decided to suspend my account. It is a part of their attempt at allowing systems that bypass security controls and act illegally and criminally to promote agendas such as the promotion of securities by unauthorised parties. Twitter is funded by people such as those using XRP and the sham Bitcoin copy or airdrop (BTC), that is funded by the mostly criminal group Blockstream. One of the bots in particular is directly coded by and linked to Blockstream. It is part of their fraud propagating a false version of Bitcoin that is designed to allow Lightning purely to bypass security controls and logging as required by the Bank Secrecy Act and to enable a system that doesn’t log on-chain.
Bitcoin is an evidence trail. Bitcoin is an immutable evidence trail that does not make drug sales on the dark web easy.
Consequently, we have placed Twitter on the third and final notice. A failure to act will be construed as complicity in such a crime and violation.
The consequences are criminal. Twitter’s violation of the mentioned laws in promoting anonymous accounts and actively aiding in deformation and hate crimes is part of their political agenda. The Metanet is designed to stop such crimes. Shadow-banning valid accounts while leaving illegal criminal actors demonstrates the complicity of Twitter here.
We shall be starting a number of actions shortly.
In the US, it is a violation of free speech. The right to free speech does not incorporate the right of others to yell and scream and drown you out. You have the right to say something but not the right to make people listen. You have the right to talk but not the right to a platform. You have the right to exclude those seeking to invade your private property or take what you say and twist it.
Trolls do not have rights to free speech associated with violating yours. They can say what they want on their own platform and property, but they have no right to enter yours.
Twitter has become the heart with other sites in the cesspit that is the Internet commons of a means to degrade our freedom. It does not promote freedom, it allows criminals and those who seek to drown out the free speech and rights of others to have a platform that is funded by those seeking a political agenda and the false promotion of illegal securities.
Twitter in particular is designed to allow for the false promotion of illegal and criminally created Ponzi scams and pump and dump schemes. The majority of cryptocurrency and ICO systems is promoted through Twitter. None of them has a real business, and all of them are illegal. The owners and creators of Twitter are heavily involved, and failed to act because of their political and commercial interests.
Twitter intentionally ignores such a type of information. As such, they fail to meet their requirements and duties under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, meaning that they have no rights as a mere provider and are guilty of all the provisions they seek to promote.
Consequently, the promotion of hate crime, defamation, and more on Twitter is at the heart of the problem with the Internet now.
It is the third and final warning that we will get to Twitter. They had a verified account, and information on my account has leaked. Watermarked information that was provided upon verification of my Twitter account has been provided to trolls. It is provable as images that I have posted to Twitter to prove my verification included stegonagraphic information detailing the time and date of the posting and who it was going to. The fact that some of the documents have been leaked proves categorically that they have been leaked by Twitter. A claim that they will not act on the DMCA on my valid account or other requirements until I send further identification even though we have linked our lawyers is invalid and not within the requirements of the law.
Continued failure to act on all of the requirements will be direct evidence that Twitter is complicit in the crime.
A media provider such as Twitter is either liable for the acts of those who post within it or neutral. But Twitter is far from neutral. They take sides. To be immune to prosecution, they would need to act in a manner that allows people to have a voice that is not twisted by false promotion and frauds. They would not promote securities and derivatives illegally and give a platform to those who are breaking the laws in nearly every country on earth while filtering those whose politics they disagree with.
Twitter is the problem.
See:
- Digital Millennium Copyright Act (known as DMCA 512 or the DMCA 1998) (United States of America) (Public Law №105–304, 112 Stat. 2860, 2877).
- Harassment Act 1997 c. 40, and ToS does not override DMCA.
- https://www.thedailybeast.com/rep-devin-nunes-files-dollar250m-defamation-lawsuit-against-twitter-two-anonymous-twitter-accounts
