Parler, LLC v. Amazon Web Services, No. 2:21-cv-00031 (BJR) (W.D. Wash.). Opposition to motion for injunction filed January 12, 2021.
Amazon Web Services (AWS) has opposed Parler’s motion for injunctive relief, asserting that its agreement with Parler permitted AWS to suspend or terminate Parler because of repeated troubling postings after the November election and after the January 6th eruption of violence in the Capitol.
AWS states that its agreement with Parler specifically permits the actions that it took. Amazon Web Services states that Parler was slow or failed to remedy threatening postings, and that when tens of thousands of posts went unaddressed, AWS was within its contractual rights to terminate or suspend Parler
Parler cannot state a claim for tortious interference with business relationships in the absence of a breach of contract, AWS reasons. AWS states that Parler has not in fact been harmed, given Parler’s assertion that it would be offline for only half a day.
AWS argues that Parler cannot state a claim for violation of the Sherman Act where there is no evidence of any anti-competitive communication, let alone agreement, between AWS and Parler’s competitor Twitter. Any difference in treatment between Parler and Twitter by AWS exists because of differences in AWS’s agreements with the two entities.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, AWS asserts that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 immunizes AWS from liability for any actions it has taken to remove offensive or harmful material from Parler, including suspension or termination.. The immunities conferred by Section 230 preclude Parler’s claims for breach of contract and anticompetitive conduct, AWS argues.
AWS states that injunctive relief is inappropriate where an injunction would inhibit or preclude AWS from entering into or policing its agreements.
AWS has submitted redacted copies of allegedly problematic postings from Parler and has submitted, with a request that they remain under seal, unredacted copies of such material.
Parler may submit a response today. At this writing no time for oral argument has been established.