Morning Tech 06/07/18 - Wayfair Update

Also in Pistiche

The prevailing wisdom heading into April’s arguments was that the court was likely to uphold the South Dakota law — though there was more question about that idea after the nine justices questioned both sides’ attorneys. Now, Carl Szabo of NetChoice, a group that has long opposed efforts to expand states’ sales taxing powers, has written a piece arguing that opponents of the current Quillprecedent remain overconfident about where they stand — and especially the idea that Justices Anthony Kennedy, who wrote an opinion several years back essentially asking to relitigate the issue, and Clarence Thomas, no fan of the dormant commerce clause, will be on their side.

Don’t Assume the Supreme Court Will Open the Door For New Internet Taxes

State tax collectors are counting on a vote from Justice Thomas to put them over the top. Knowing that Justice Thomas isn’t a fan of the dormant commerce clause, one of the many issues at play in Wayfair, these tax-advocates are already counting his vote.

Too bad they haven’t looked back more than a couple of years. If they did see what Thomas, Kennedy, and Scalia all agreed in Quill, these tax advocates would realize that Thomas may not help them, and in fact, Kennedy might not either.

For a Smooth Ride, e-Scooter Providers and Cities Need to Get Along

America’s tech industry has embraced the idea of permissionless innovation, where new online business models set up operations without requesting approval from public officials. That’s how eBay revolutionized the way people sell their stuff, and it’s how sharing economy businesses became a great way for Americans to rent their own homes and cars to travelers.

To be sure, permissionless innovation has brought new waves of competition and consumer choice. But sometimes those waves wash right over public officials, raising their skepticism and scrutiny. We’ve already seen the pitfalls of permissionless innovation when some businesses placed their bikes and scooters on city streets.

Read More at National League of Cities’s CitySpeak

The Daily Caller: A Primer For CONFUSED Conservatives On The First Amendment And Free Speech On Social Media

Conservatives value a strict adherence to principles because of what can happen when a society drifts from its core values. It’s crucial they remember these principles in the age of the internet.

As President Ronald Reagan said, “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”

Government regulation of free speech online would not safeguard the future of conservative speech. It would endanger it.

The Daily Caller - Conservative Principles Don’t Justify Silencing Conservatives

Carl Szabo — general counsel for NetChoice, a trade association representing Facebook, Google and other Big Tech entities — argued in TheDC that conservatives don’t have free speech on social media platforms.

According to Szabo, the core conservative principles of limited government and opposition to state interference in private enterprise should preclude the Right from showing any concern over social media censorship. (RELATED: SORRY CONSERVATIVES: You Don’t Have Free Speech On Facebook Or Twitter)

 

Daily Caller - Conservative Principles Don't Justify Silencing Conservatives

Carl Szabo — general counsel for NetChoice, a trade association representing Facebook, Google and other Big Tech entities — argued in TheDC that conservatives don’t have free speech on social media platforms.

According to Szabo, the core conservative principles of limited government and opposition to state interference in private enterprise should preclude the Right from showing any concern over social media censorship. (RELATED: SORRY CONSERVATIVES: You Don’t Have Free Speech On Facebook Or Twitter)

 

Virginia Supreme Court ruling on license plates creates dangerous speed bumps for law enforcement

A license plate number would not be “personal information” because there is nothing about a license plate number that inherently “describes, locates or indexes anything about an individual.” Without something connecting the license plate number to an individual, it is just a combination of letters and numbers that does not describe, locate or index anything about anyone.

The Roanoke Times - Virginia Supreme Court ruling on license plates creates dangerous speed bumps for law enforcement

The Roanoke Times – Virginia Supreme Court ruling on license plates creates dangerous speed bumps for law enforcement

A license plate number would not be “personal information” because there is nothing about a license plate number that inherently “describes, locates or indexes anything about an individual.” Without something connecting the license plate number to an individual, it is just a combination of letters and numbers that does not describe, locate or index anything about anyone.

The Daily Caller - SORRY, CONSERVATIVES: You Don’t Have Free Speech On Facebook Or Twitter

If a business decides to favor your point of view, you would likely see that as a good thing and spend more time on that platform. Conversely, you would be less likely to spend time on the opposing platform. But at the end of the day, businesses must be allowed to do as they see fit. And as users, if we don’t like something, we can simply go somewhere else, allowing the market to pick winners and losers.

USNewsCo - Austin rental bike, scooter rules debut to mixed reaction by companies

NetChoice, a trade association of eCommerce and online businesses, says the rules would make it “nearly impossible for dockless bike providers to run a viable service for city residents.”

“If Austin had the choice back when they started their docked bike-sharing system, the city would surely have chosen dockless over docked bikes,” said Steve DelBianco, president of NetChoice.  “The ATD proposal flies in the face of good city planning and customer service. Dockless systems are far less expensive to implement, and serve residents in neighborhoods that are never going to get a docking platform.”