Additional Public Comment . Open this item . Okay Public Comment is closed. And opening up to commissioners commissioner antonini. This as a very good project and for my purposes consider sacramento a designation a number of stores and restaurant and other things i will go to sacramento for i dont live neighborhood nor is my business in that neighborhood that in and of itself it sounds like a very good improvement restoring the windows and making that assessable to two different ways it will make a more attractive frontage and potential for quite a few of the jobs and i witnessed this all the time where people i know will drive out of San Francisco for a particular product or service and saving 2 thousand people if driving to palo alto is good in keeping tax revenue in San Francisco so i think this is a very good and their also making street tree improvements and staff has already opined this is a retail are accessory so i think i mean there was one speaker that brought that up if that
Video has been removed of the beheading of a journalist by militants. Twitter said this is the latest example of social Media Companies policing user content from open internet policy many have embraced for years. I spoke with courtney radish, david kirkpatrick, and a law professor. I asked if there were any legal issues for social Media Companies policing user posts. The legal point is the First Amendment which guarantees free speech as a fundamental right. Over the years where it has been litigation, mostly focused on filing video for children and the like and not so much on what happens in real news. The freedom of speech curtailed mostly on sex but theres a lot less litigation on violence and in recent weeks, we have been flooded with images from around the world. The last series of images we have seen from gaza and the ukraine and all of these raise issues that have not been extensively litigated. Not necessarily illegal or legal . Is that what you are saying . As far as First Ame
Video has been removed of the beheading of a journalist by militants. Twitter said this is the latest example of social Media Companies policing user content from open internet policy many have embraced for years. I spoke with courtney radish, david kirkpatrick, and a law professor. I asked if there were any legal issues for social Media Companies policing user posts. The legal point is the First Amendment which guarantees free speech as a fundamental right. Over the years where it has been litigation, mostly focused on filing video for children and the like and not so much on what happens in real news. The freedom of speech curtailed mostly on sex but theres a lot less litigation on violence and in recent weeks, we have been flooded with images from around the world. The last series of images we have seen from gaza and the ukraine and all of these raise issues that have not been extensively litigated. Not necessarily illegal or legal . Is that what you are saying . As far as First Ame
Twitter removed video has been removed of the beheading of a journalist by militants. Twitter said this is the latest example of social Media Companies policing user content, a change from open internet policy many have embraced for years. I spoke with courtney radish, david kirkpatrick, and a law professor. I asked if there were any legal issues for social Media Companies policing user posts. The legal point is the First Amendment which guarantees free speech as a fundamental right. Over the years where it has been litigation, mostly focused on fake things, like violent video for children and the like and not so much on what happens in real news. The freedom of speech curtailed mostly on sex but theres a lot less litigation on violence and in recent weeks, we have been flooded with images from around the world. The last series of images we have seen from gaza and the ukraine and all of these raise issues that have not been extensively litigated. Not necessarily illegal or legal . Is t
Sensitive . Video has been removed of the beheading of a journalist by militants. Twitter said this is the latest example of social Media Companies policing user content from open internet policy many have embraced for years. I spoke with courtney radish, david kirkpatrick, and a law professor. I asked if there were any legal issues for social Media Companies policing user posts. The legal point is the First Amendment which guarantees free speech as a fundamental right. Over the years where it has been litigation, mostly focused on filing video for children and the like and not so much on what happens in real news. The freedom of speech curtailed mostly on sex but theres a lot less litigation on violence and in recent weeks, we have been flooded with images from around the world. The last series of images we have seen from gaza and the ukraine and all of these raise issues that have not been extensively litigated. Not necessarily illegal or legal . Is that what you are saying . As far