Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Dirty salesforce silicon valley - funds anti gun lefties


calfoxwc

Recommended Posts

and worse. They are ordering their customers who sell AR-15s and semi-auto rifles (like my .22) that take a mag, to stop using their software.

This seems illegal. Political blackmail? Finally, that is where david Little Pig Hogg got money to become a well known name. and Pelosi gets money from them....

The nazis used economics to force Jews out of business.... The left is sounding more and more like the Borg of Star Trek. "We will assimilate you"

https://www.ammoland.com/2019/06/camping-world-is-the-latest-victim-of-saleforces-social-justice-extortion/?utm_source=Ammoland+Subscribers&utm_campaign=dcabdcc2eb-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f6fac3eaa-dcabdcc2eb-20770865#axzz5pmz5Adkc

"The company also include liberal anti-gun politicians as their early investors. These investors include Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi vowed to make gun control a vital issue in the House of Representatives for this term.

Fifty women and girls have sued the software firm Salesforce for designing tools that helped traffickers sell them for sex on the classified ad site Backpage.com. It seems Salesforce has no issue trying to tell its customer companies what they can and can not sell when it comes to legal guns, but they had no issue profiting from sex trafficking by creating customized data tools for online sex provider Backpage.

Salesforce downplayed the impact of the change. A spokesperson from the company said the move is only affecting only a handful of its customers. Their current customers would have until their contracts expire to stop selling the items in question or find another solution to use for their CRM needs.

The company has used its weight in the past for Benioff's crusades. In 2015, he threatened to use the power of Salesforce to put “economic sanctions” against Indiana if then-Governor Mike Pence signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. He cited human rights, but according to a lawsuit filed in March of this year, Backpage.com was facilitating sex trafficking using the company's services."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

which obviously isn't saying much at all.

Nerd culture is destroying Silicon Valley — Quartz

 
Oct 13, 2014 - We're still behaving like the Rebel Alliance, but now we're the Empire.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sep 8, 2017 - The lives of tech entrepreneurs aren't always as glamorous as they're made out to be, as I learned living among them on a dangerous San ...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/06/18/strassel_nails_the_lefts_intimidation_crusade_130905.html

Can't use a service used denial/intimidation to deny Constitutional God-Given rights.

Violates the civil rights.

1st Amendment.

2nd Amendment.

"Life, LIberty and the Pursuit of Happiness"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law

" Preventing collusion and cartels that act in restraint of trade is an essential task of antitrust law. It reflects the view that each business has a duty to act independently on the market, and so earn its profits solely by providing better priced and quality products than its competitors. The Sherman Act §1 prohibits "[e]very contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce."

Monopoly and power

Main articles: Monopoly and Market power
Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

Sherman Act 1890 §2

The law's treatment of monopolies is potentially the strongest in the field of antitrust law. Judicial remedies can force large organizations to be broken up, be run subject to positive obligations, massive penalties may be imposed, and/or the people involved can be sentenced to jail. Under §2 of the Sherman Act 1890 every "person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize ... any part of the trade or commerce among the several States" commits an offence.[27] The courts have interpreted this to mean that monopoly is not unlawful per se, but only if acquired through prohibited conduct.[28] Historically, where the ability of judicial remedies to combat market power have ended, the legislature of states or the Federal government have still intervened by taking public ownership of an enterprise, or subjecting the industry to sector specific regulation (frequently done, for example, in the cases water, education, energy or health care). The law on public services and administration goes significantly beyond the realm of antitrust law's treatment of monopolies. When enterprises are not under public ownership, and where regulation does not foreclose the application of antitrust law, two requirements must be shown for the offense of monopolization. First, the alleged monopolist must possess sufficient power in an accurately defined market for its products or services. Second, the monopolist must have used its power in a prohibited way. The categories of prohibited conduct are not closed, and are contested in theory. Historically they have been held to include exclusive dealing, price discrimination, refusing to supply an essential facility, product tying and predatory pricing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry bub that doesnt apply to a product like salesforce. They can choose to not do business with whomever they please. If it hurts their brand in doing so...well tgats capitslism. Im fully aware the leftist outrage that would ensue ifvthey did this to an lbgt group. But oh well. 

This isnt a restaurant or grocery store discriminating on the vasis of race, sex orvethnicity. Salesforce doesnt want to associate with companies selling firearms and its their legal right to do so. Sorry. Go back to school cal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 women sue Salesforce, claiming it helped Backpage in sex trafficking

 

 
Mar 27, 2019 - 50 women sue Salesforce, claiming it helped Backpage in sex trafficking. The lawsuit paints a dark picture of Salesforce, which has long touted human rights and building technology for the greater good. The women, referred to only as anonymous Jane Does, identify themselves as victims of sex trafficking, rape and abuse ...
Mar 28, 2019 - The lawsuit makes a bunch of leaps to argue that Salesforce is somehow magically responsible for people doing illegal things on Backpage.
Court: Missouri Eastern District Court Defendant: Patel Dilipkumar dba Delux Motel, salesforce.com, inc. Plaintiff: Jane Doe Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury ...
Mar 27, 2019 - Shares of Salesforce.com (CRM) are down 3.5% midday Wednesday, to $153.82, following a lawsuit alleging that the company did business ..
Link to comment
Share on other sites

so in essence, going after salesforce because one of their customers used their marketing snd data tools to traffic humans....is literally exactly like holding a gun manufacturer accountable for one of their guns used in a mass shooting.

I for one find some of these data yools incredibly pernicious and damn near encroaching on constitutional rights to privacy. But they'd better have some serious evidence thst people at sales force explicitly knew their product was being to used to traffic humans. If not...that countersuit is gonna hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm no attorney ....but...

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/house-judiciary-investigate-market-dominance-big-tech-companies-n1013426

"A small number of dominant, unregulated platforms have extraordinary power over commerce, communication, and information online," the Judiciary Committee noted in a news release that included the names of both Democratic and Republican members. "Based on investigative reporting and oversight by international policymakers and enforcers, there are concerns that these platforms have the incentive and ability to harm the competitive process."

"The Antitrust Subcommittee will conduct a top-to-bottom review of the market power held by giant tech platforms. This is the first time Congress has undertaken an investigation into this behavior."

One area of the investigation is likely to be particularly unwelcome among tech executives: The committee said it would look into whether existing antitrust laws and enforcement levels are adequate to address the growing concentration of power in the tech industry.

"Given the growing tide of concentration and consolidation across our economy, it is vital that we investigate the current state of competition in digital markets and the health of the antitrust laws," committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said in the announcement.

The news comes just as the federal government has reportedly been preparing to ramp up its antitrust oversight of U.S. tech companies amid growing political pressure that has included increasing scrutiny

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, calfoxwc said:

I'm no attorney ....but...

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/house-judiciary-investigate-market-dominance-big-tech-companies-n1013426

"A small number of dominant, unregulated platforms have extraordinary power over commerce, communication, and information online," the Judiciary Committee noted in a news release that included the names of both Democratic and Republican members. "Based on investigative reporting and oversight by international policymakers and enforcers, there are concerns that these platforms have the incentive and ability to harm the competitive process."

"The Antitrust Subcommittee will conduct a top-to-bottom review of the market power held by giant tech platforms. This is the first time Congress has undertaken an investigation into this behavior."

One area of the investigation is likely to be particularly unwelcome among tech executives: The committee said it would look into whether existing antitrust laws and enforcement levels are adequate to address the growing concentration of power in the tech industry.

"Given the growing tide of concentration and consolidation across our economy, it is vital that we investigate the current state of competition in digital markets and the health of the antitrust laws," committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said in the announcement.

The news comes just as the federal government has reportedly been preparing to ramp up its antitrust oversight of U.S. tech companies amid growing political pressure that has included increasing scrutiny

u finally posted something this year i tacitly agree with

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yep, you were wrong - it's a very possible legal crime. We'll see.

It's ok, I don't need your rambling, incoherent apology.e48cf8504295a355cb61b0993a65f09a.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Chemist said:

So you have no problem denying service to fags? 

if you discriminate on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender.etc….what's that called? Go back to HS bub. Companies can terminate business relationships with each other, it happens all the time. The ONLY sticking point is if there's an contractual obligations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...